= new reply since forum marked as read
WTF is the obsession with Greenwald? 
Who is this anti-Democratic faction that he speaks of?
is some way, shape or form...I think he needs to lay off the weed...paranoia self-destroya. 
Doesn't mean I don't have respect for Hillary.
Doesn't mean I'm against what Greenwald did.
Not everything is black and white here.
2. The Americans killed were young, healthy, and did represent "the best of the best" (see Tillman, Pat). I'll even make your point further before I argue against it: if it weren't for signifigant advances in battlefield medicine since the 70s, we'd have an Iraq/Afghanistan memorial to rival the Vietnam Wall. Many more than were killed came back mentally and physically maimed. Having said all of that, the low-end of estimates that I've read (going back over 10 years) is that 15,000 Americans died every year from simply lacking healthcare. One of the chief reasons I supported John Kerry, then Hillary, then President Obama, was that I saw this as the number one issue in America. We were horrified and outraged as a nation when +/- 3,000 innocent Americans died on 9-11; however we were (as a nation) completely ignorant of the fact that 5 times that many (and I've seen DUers elsewhere cite figures stating as many as 40K per year, which would be 13 9-11s) died every single year from a cause that was 100% preventable. Are some old? Yes. But do the young and healthy benefit? Through screening; through higher quality prenatal care; through having chronic conditions like diabetes be managed.
1. This will sound selfish to a certain portion of DU (perhaps including you):
My voting considerations start in the US and work outward. My opposition to the Iraq war was not based on the human toll, it was based on the American toll. There was no need to involve Americans in removing Saddam Hussein from power; his ability to make war on others had been contained, and though he was a dictatorial S.O.B., there are many dictatorial S.O.B.s in the world, and it's not our job to police them. Our first priorities should be to solve problems here in America: ensuring that all of our children (not just those in wealthy school districts) receive quality educations; rebuilding our cities; balancing our trade deficit; ensuring that those who benefit most from the American economy pay for governance in proportion to their benefit; ensuring that we keep faith with our veterans; ensuring that the bounty of our economy is available to all, regardless of faith, color, or gender. I could go on. My second consideration is our neighbors. I want to do whatever we can do to assist Canada, Mexico, and the Caribbean remain peaceful and prosperous. That does not mean bending over and accepting a pipeline that does not make sense at any level to build. It does mean that I think NAFTA makes a helluva lot more sense than MFN for China, or TPP.
I've gone on too long as it is, so I won't detail what I'de have done differently after 9-11. However, I will say this. No good can come or has come from involvement in the Middle East. In a perfect world, we'd stop trying to broker peace agreements between parties that seem to want perpetual war; stop supporting absolute monarchs who practice modern-day slavery; and should stop taking sides in civil wars in which neither side is right. In a perfect world, we'd concentrate our efforts on making America the best nation it can be, and when we've done that, make it better. If we want respect, we should lead not by force, but by example. If we want secure borders, we should help our neighbors. So why only American lives? They are the lives I care about and the lives that should be the focus of our leaders.
If you read this far, you are sorry you asked
American lives are more important to me. Have a nice day.
You seem to poll because you actually think it means something.
I've seen a number of original posts from you where you cite unscientific DU polls are proof...of....something....
Pretty much everything else was secondary after that
