An Easy Call

MaxSpeaks puts this so simply that you almost miss the genius of it:

"If you had your way, Saddam would still be in power." Yes, if I had my way, Saddam would probably still be in power. And ten thousand American families would not be suffering. That's an easy call.

Why aren't we saying something like this more often?  In a country where the Right calls the Left the "Blame America First" party, why is it somehow unpatriotic when you say that, yes, I'd rather have Saddam in power than to have American families without their loved ones?  Why is THAT instance the instance where you CANNOT care about America first?

Comments

[Mark]

Based upon that argument, the USA should not have taken on Hitler and freed the concentration camps because tens of thousands of American Families would suffer.

[Dylan]

To be sure, there are times when we should go to war.

As you know, I don't believe this is one of those times, and I am simply saying that, in this case, Getting rid of Saddam Hussein in of itself was not worth the suffering of American families.

And because the "This world is better without Saddam Hussein than with him" arguement is the only one left to the Right, this should be our counter-arguement.

[jpe]

Based upon that argument, the USA should not have taken on Hitler and freed the concentration camps because tens of thousands of American Families would suffer.

You missed the point pretty badly, chief. There was no argument, merely a conclusion. It's telling that you automatically read a pacifist principle into the post.

[Mark]

JPE... there was no argument? The title of the post is "an easy call". Tha suggests that a decision was made....the argument is the validity of the decision....Dylan made a quote to justify it. I argued it. Doesn't mean I'm right or wrong...but there's certainly an argument. I think Dylan would agree. Unlike the issue at hand, the fact there is an argument seems pretty straight forward to me.