From Today's Star-Tribune:
Trade peace for war
Why are the only two options being looked at: to stay in Iraq in full force or to pull out (Star Tribune, March 9)? It seems to me that a fair solution to our problem is gradual removal of all troops.
Up to this point, this has been a reasonable letter to the editor. You're thinking, "Hm, okay, I may not agree entirely, but I'd like to read a bit more about what you have to say." And you're whacked across the face with a baseball bat when you continue reading:
For every service person who is sent home, we should send an unarmed humanitarian worker into Iraq. This is a peaceful resolution the whole world can support. Let's finish this job!
You read that right, folks. We should send an UNARMED HUMANITARIAN WORKER INTO IRAQ FOR EVERY SERVICE PERSON WHO IS SENT HOME. In a similar initiative, bunnies and kittens will be deployed to the next starving pit-bull convention.
I just love how volunteer humanitarian workers will just be magically sent into Iraq, and unarmed to boot. The Unarmed Humanitarian Workers (UHW) are a little known additional branch of our military. It goes: Army, Navy, Air Force, Marines, (Coast Guard), Unarmed Humanitarian Workers (UHW). They would have added a sixth side to the Pentagon to accommodate the UHW branch, but there were so few of them they got a basement office next to the water heater.
I will now print the letter's writer so people reading this will know to point and laugh if they ever encounter him.
MICHAEL OIEN, FALCON HEIGHTS
Posted by Ryan at March 12, 2007 08:40 AM | TrackBackMichael should be the first to go. What do you suppose the over/under is in minutes on Iraqi soil before his head is forcibly removed from his body? Great form of birth control though!
Posted by: Noodles at March 12, 2007 11:21 AMI just love how volunteer humanitarian workers will just be magically sent into Iraq
Well, see, there's your problem. I don't see the word "volunteer" anywhere in the source text. If you take that out of the equation, the rest of it becomes a lot easier.
Posted by: Joshua at March 12, 2007 06:02 PMBecause there are so many conscripted humanitarian workers in the world today.
Posted by: Ryan at March 12, 2007 06:39 PMThink outside the box, dude.
Posted by: Joshua at March 12, 2007 07:14 PMThe only thing I can think you're thinking of is that the author is using sarcasm.
But then, I've always been an inside the box thinker.
Posted by: Ryan at March 12, 2007 09:13 PMNahh, I think that the writer meant to send a peace activist into Iraq in place of every soldier sent home.
After all, "humanitarian" equals peace activist, right.
A stunning idea by the way.
If Michael won't take credit for this revision, I certainly will.
Peace out dudes, and sniper rifles to all with American passports.
Posted by: at March 13, 2007 09:42 PM
Stumble It!
