There is no doubt that the United States and its Sidekick did an admirable job of avoiding bombing historical sites, hospitals, and essential infrastructure in its invasion of Iraq. This was very fortunate, because it meant that the Iraqis could demonstrate their independence by looting and burning these institutions for themselves. We have a lot to learn from this ancient and venerable civilization. For example, for every Iraqi who was killed by the US in the present venture, their own previous leader had killed hundreds or thousands in useless wars and internal oppression. This proves once again how advanced they are over our poor attempts at slaughter.

The Iraqis have little commercial sense. Otherwise, they wouldn't be destroying those statues and images of Saddam Hussein, but offering them on eBay. "Wall-to-wall wall with portrait, $12,000 + shipping. You install." or "35-foot-tall statue with raised fist. One-of-a-kind, custom made for world-famous leader..."

Of course there are some things that we did better then they. By launching a massive attack instead of patiently waiting for inspections to hobble the regime over the space of a few years, the United States administration reduced the duration of the war enough to stay almost within the attention span of a television-besotted public. In the old days, a war could go on for years because long periods of time went without any events worthy of banner headlines.

Besides, if the war took too long, it wouldn't help win votes in the next election.

A victory in Iraq is gratifying to some, will mollify many others who were previously critics, it allows us to plant evidence of weapons of mass destruction, and it strikes a blow for the wonderful idea that the ends justify the means. Soon the President's advisors will notice that we can end domestic homelessness and hunger by merely killing all the poor people (call it "The War on Poverty"). This would be quick and positive, with almost no loss of Republican voters.

A German guy called that method a "Final Solution" but it didn't work, so we have come to realize that every group has something to contribute to its own and the world's well-being. As radical feminists like to point out, the nurturing nature of women makes them better suited as peaceful political leaders, like Margaret Thatcher. Certainly African-Americans, due to their long oppression, will create laws to make this country fairer toward all as they ascend to positions of power, as the decisions of Clarence Thomas demonstrate. Religion is a powerful force for righteous behavior, and we can only admire the way that the Catholic church has shielded its pedophile priests from vindictive prosecutors. Indigenous people such as Africans who understand the importance of tribal affinities know best how to make their own countries prosperous and safe. The Jews, despised and humiliated by nearly every culture they've lived with, have thereby internalized the principle of supporting the weak and downtrodden, which is why they are so beloved by the displaced Palestinians.

And now the US-Iraq war adds its luster to the halls of history, demonstrating that a big, strong, rich country can beat a small, weak, and impoverished one so long as the small country has assets with fixed GPS coordinates, and so long as they don't have any silly jungles to hide in.

Jef