Block, Siteadmin, SkipCaptcha, Upload, Automoderated users, delete, edit, move, nsTeam2RO, nsTeam2RW, nsTeam2_talkRO, nsTeam2_talkRW, protect, rollback, Administrators, template
293,832
edits
Changes
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
Line 216:
Line 216: + + − == Liberals and Saddam ==+ −
undeniable fact
:Those things are ok sometimes depending on who wrote them. [[User:Myk|Myk]] 11:19, 22 March 2007 (EDT)
:Those things are ok sometimes depending on who wrote them. [[User:Myk|Myk]] 11:19, 22 March 2007 (EDT)
== Liberals and Saddam ==
::The portion about being supportive of Saddam is particularly egregious.--[[User:Murray|Murray]] 17:53, 22 March 2007 (EDT)
::The portion about being supportive of Saddam is particularly egregious.--[[User:Murray|Murray]] 17:53, 22 March 2007 (EDT)
This article is unfair to the many liberals who oppose any dictatorship. The piece about liberals is just there to infume them. Lets be fair, because we wouldn't like it either if the article on ''conservative'' said that conservatives have no problems with human right violations and murder, such as in Chile under Pinochet or Burma now, as long as the regime works with them. [[User:Order]]
:This is an undeniable fact. In 2003, so-called liberals were ''the only'' group who (a) identified themselves as liberals and (b) opposed Iraqi human rights and democracy. No one else shared thier views in 2003. [[User:RobS|RobS]] 20:37, 22 March 2007 (EDT)
This article is unfair to the many liberals who oppose any dictatorship. The piece about liberals is just there to infume them. Lets be fair, because we wouldn't like it either if the article on ''conservative'' said that conservatives have no problems with human right violations and murder, such as in Chile under Pinochet or Burma now, as long as the regime works with them. [[User:Order]]