Czuch: "do you believe it is okay to use military force for the purpose of liberating people from an unworthy, and otherwise evil regime?"

The simple rule is to stay out of people's business. Unworthy? The U.S. regime is also unworthy. Evil? The U.S. regime is also evil in many ways. Does that justify Russia, or China, or somebody else coming to "liberate us" from our oppressive government?

But even if, for the sake of argument, it were right to liberate a people not asking to be liberated....let us assume the evil ruler is killing all his subjects and not using chemical weapons we supplied him with to do it, as in our old friend Saddam's case (remember we put him in power & he was our ally up until Gulf War I)....let's assume it is a genuine rescue of a people desperately oppressed....well then, maybe a case could be made for that, like rescuing a child from abusive parents.

And that, naturally, is what the U.S. claims its mission was in Iraq. If that's true, why stop at Iraq? Why not rescue the Chinese and the Russians and every oppressed people the world over? Since we are so wise & wonderful, why not just police the whole world for everybody's good...even if they don't recognize that good for themselves? Even you ought to be able to recognize how anti-democratic, anti-libertarian, anti-freedom such a concept really is. Every people has the fundamental right of self-determination. It is on this right we ourselves stood, when we declared our independence in 1776.

And it isn't the case at all that we are spreading liberty, even in Iraq. It's the cover story. But we've brought slaughter and chaos to Iraq, not liberation. We have killed, not healed. We've brought more oppression, in the guise of a puppet-democracy. The only Iraqis we've freed are the dead ones...we freed them from the sorrows of life. It doesn't take a genius to see this, only a fairly impartial observer.

I've reached my 500 word limit.