Woof I do appologize - on roundtable discussion and below in your shoutbox I tried to be "ironic" and funny, sorry if I offended you in any way it was never intended. - I very much liked your "blinked inocently"

So you edit your posts? - I did likewise, but I didn't erase my post, yours would look out of place - just read my edit, if you want.

AHHHHHHHH!! I did read it, but I was going too many directions at once and somehow missed adding that to my list of questions! It was a good one, too, and he'd have enjoyed it. Maybe one of our friends can catch it at an upcoming signing; I know we have some in the right places.

What I was saying is we had a responsibility to help Iraq get their infrastructure back together. I didn't say we invaded for the right reasons. Although I totally, totally dispute that it had anything to do wit oil. That is verging on crazy conspiracy territory, which will end the conversation pretty quick, lol. What I'm saying, regardless of how we got there, is that we needed to stay, to fix what we broke.

Besides which, my post didn't talk about nation building. It talked about infrastructure _re_building. We broke it, we have to fix it.

And yet, people HAVE intentionally changed the culture of _this_ country. :) We'll just have to agree to disagree.

I'm not going to argue your point RE: the American War Machine. I don't see defense spending the same way you do. I think American defense spending is almost solely responsible for us not having had a WWIII. And since more people died in WWII than in all the other wars we have fought combined... I consider it an investment in our children. 'Nuff said as far as I'm concerned. As far as the rest of what you said... my comments were not towards turning Iraq into a Democracy, but helping them rebuild the infrastructure (roads, power, water, etc...) that WE destroyed. Once Saddam was removed and caught, the danger to us was not from Iraq, but from some other power-hungry nation/dictator/warlord/terrorist stepping in to fill the void that WE created. This is what happened when we used Afghanistan as a puppet against the Soviet Union and Iran in the 80s. It DIRECTLY led to 9/11. We supplied Afghanistan with weapons and money to fight the Soviets, they kept Big Red occupied for years, fought them off. In the process, their contry was blasted back to the freakin' STONE AGE... and we did nothing to help them get back on their feet. This DIRECTLY led to the Taliban coming to power. We (and the Soviets) created the power vacuum that led to 9/11. When people say we need to stay in Iraq for our National Security (at least those who truly understand the issues), it is because of THAT, not some immediate threat that they pose. Not to mention, I believe we have a moral obligation to help rebuild a Iraq's military, power and water services, and economy, since we destroyed it. Since we have a the moral obligation, and it would be damned dangerous to us to leave Iraq just sitting there as a void for some other power to snatch up... for me at least, that is compelling reason enough to still be there.

See, that might be the case... except the republicans also won the house and the senate. It was less of a case of blind patriotism, and more of a case of, well, what Bush ran on. Stay the course. We're there, we have a responsibility to finish what we started and not leave the country in total chaos, creating a situation in Iraq like what the USSR created in Afghanistan. Which of course, came back to take a big chunk out of the collective Western World's ass. I viewed it as America taking responsibility for it's actions, not being blindly patriotic. That responsibility is what promoted America to "Greatest Nation" status after World War II. I really feel that the current economic crisis sabotaging that sense of responsibility. Not as a collective nation, but as individuals. Which is way, way worse for us

Are you referring to 9/11 or Iraq? Without any hype... the President doesn't read and make decisions on raw data. He makes decisions based on what the National Security Adviser reports to him. There were a small number of analysts that were constantly bringing the danger of Bin Laden before their bosses. Their 35 years in intelligence, been with the Agency for 25 years bosses. These were not Bush appointees ignoring their own analysts.

Subwoofer, are you still having problems accessing and commenting on the site?