I can live with that bro. As long as you are being intellectually honest, then I don't care what side of the aisle you are coming from. (Not that my opinion really matters though.)

My problem is with the knee-jerk, Pavlovian reaction exhibited by many.

Peace out.

Israel could have taken care of Iraq with out any problem. Thing is they would have had to take out the rest of the ME as well and I am guessing that was not a desirable out come. The ME looks like a business to me. Iran, Iraq and Libya are the gangs on the block trying to screw things up. The ME may not like Israel but they seem to know where everyone stands. Iraq invaded Kuwait and no one in the area liked that. They called us on to kick them out. We did. Israel was put on a short leash and told not to bite. We are addicted to oil and we are protecting our interests. I don’t like it but it is the reality we live in. Should we be helping Israel? IMO yes we should because I think it is the right thing to so. Bosnia? Yes for the same reason. Haiti? Not sure but I think yes. I think we should also be in Dafur and several other places to at least try and help. If it does not work, then we leave but we have an obligation as a member of the human race to at least try.

We are one planet and one people. We should all be helping each other. Watching other die when we have the ability to help is deplorable.

So, what is your way of operation? Just do what you feel like doing, nevermind how the game is played? How do you decide what to do? Roll the dice?

If you believe this is about making the world a better place by removing Hussien, I have a bridge to sell you. If you believe we care about what Hussien did, does or will do as long as it cannot affect us in some way, shape or form, I'll sell you that bridge cheap. It is about protecting our interests. Same as Gulf War I, WWII, Panama, and the list goes on. Why do you say they opted correctly and we didn't? Because they opted and not us? Here is the part I don't follow. Russia, France and Germany all opted not to attack because they had their own axes to grind. We do the same and we are wrong but they were correct? Now you have me confused. Let me as you a question. If I accused you of breach of contract and the judge is my father and a couple of my business partners are on the jury, would you go along with whatever the trial outcome is? If yes, ok. If no, why do you think that Russia, France and Germany did the right thing considering they all have interests in Hussien being in power? Remember, the contracts and IOUs are signed with Hussien's regime and the current regime has absolutely no obligation to fulfill them nor will it do so unless, of course, it suits them.

Here is a scenario that I would love to know what to do. So far, nobody has got a decent answer. Are you saying that if we either weaned ourselves off oil or found a huge oil reserve, etc, etc but somehow became independent of oil ourselves, life would be hunky dory? That seems to be what you are saying. You seem to be saying that if we are not addicted to oil, we wouldn't be there, right? Ok. Lets say I fixed the problem by digging a 60 foot hole in my yard and found this mega reserve that could supply USA and all it's needs for 1000 years. Would that solve the problem if the rest of the world is still addicted and we cannot supply them all? Once again, you have the mindset that we can stand alone. Years ago, yes. Today, no. If China tanked tomorrow, would we be affected? What about Asia? What about India? What about...... You see, the problem isn't a USA problem. The problem is that if Asia could feel Black Monday here at USA, we can also feel their Black Monday, when it occures. It all is connected. Think of a swimming pool. Drop a rock and watch the ripples. Yes, you dropped it at one end but somehow, your rubber ducky at the other end is bobbing too. What gives?

This fiasco is about how we have shafted ourselves by making the military move in step with the civillian govt. The military should be given a mandate and once accepted, they get on with it. Instead, we have the military told to do something but the civillian groups are telling them how and when to do it instead of letting them do their job the way they think fit. Generals wanted more troops. Rumsfeld said to use his whiz-bang special forces. Yes, SF is great for certain things. A scaple is a great tool for cutting meat. However, when you want to fell a tree, a scaple just doesn't cut it. However, SF makes the least waves which is the political thing to do otherwise it looks bad. So, the armed forces have to make do with fewer troops. Fewer troops means that they don't have enough people to secure things which is like casting a big net with large mesh trying to catch minows.