Re: That's a totally different animal than Saddam Hussein and Robert Mugabe. The first two lack(ed) the support of their country's populations, and their policies have decimated their country's economies.
Mugabe is an innocuous, garden-variety African leader... Unlike Sharon, he doesn't rule over a country that maintains a nuclear arsenal, Mugabe didn't invade his neighbors (remember Lebanon, Sabra and Chatilla, Syria, the strike on Osiraq [Iraq],...)--although he did send troops to the DRC upon Laurent-Désiré Kabila's request... Mugabe does enjoy popular support --of course, not among "white farmers"... Yet Mugabe will never be able to bring the world to the brink of WWIII --American Jesus freaks will never call for nuking Zimbabwe's foes.
Whether Sharon is an elected head of state or not is, as far as world peace is concerned, irrelevant... after all, back in 1933, Hitler too was elected to the German Chancellery...
Besides, the whole of Latin America is economically bankrupt... does the US plan to invade Argentina, Peru, Ecuador, Colombia,...?
Gus |
