depends on wich policies, if it's the financial policies than probably not.d
if someone disagrees with the policy to not encourage death camps for some racial groups than probably d
Sir Humphrey: The only way to understand the Press is to remember that they pander to their readers' prejudices.
Jim Hacker: Don't tell me about the Press. I know *exactly* who reads the papers. The Daily Mirror is read by the people who think they run the country. The Guardian is read by people who think they *ought* to run the country. The Times is read by the people who actually *do* run the country. The Daily Mail is read by the wives of the people who run the country. The Financial Times is read by people who *own* the country. The Morning Star is read by people who think the country ought to be run by *another* country. The Daily Telegraph is read by the people who think it is.
Sir Humphrey: Prime Minister, what about the people who read The Sun?
Bernard Woolley: Sun readers don't care *who* runs the country - as long as she's got big tits.
worst way is to molest him/her and then say it to the media +police and wait until a newsreporter stands for your house and says "he was molested by his dad" then yell : "i'm not really his dad"
I kind of disagree.
remember that america arguably did the right thing for the wrong reasons sadam hussein was a terrible leader and did horrible things
(http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Halabja_chemical_attack)
if that was the reason that they invaded (genocide and the possibility of more genocide) I think everyone would be much more understanding
therefore I would not say it is the same as is often the case when different conflicts are compared I believe that every conflict should be looked at in it's own perspective.
however if you want to have an example of a war wich was 'worse'
I think vietnam is a much better example than iraq
replydetachattach picture