Zarak - I would not expect the US to attack any other countries in the near future. Diplomacy is at work as we speak.....it will be a bumpy road, but it's already in the works in both Iran and N.Korea. Your response is going to be that we didn't use diplomacy in Iraq, so why should we expect to see it elsewhere. My response has been covered numerous times in this thread. We attacked Iraq because we could. They were in direct violation of the UN sanctions, thhey had been playing cat and mouse w/ the UN/US for over 10 years, they had a documented inventory of weapons following the first war, and they had a documented and undisputed intent to gather more weapons. The green flag was there and there was no reason to believe that Iraq was ever going to fully abide by all of the sanctions. In the climate we were in, the President "took the shot". I don't want to get back into the argument about whether it was a good decision, etc. I'm just saying that the Iraq situation is completely different than both Iran and N.Korea.

Jorge - Less Government and Liberal cannot be used in the same sentance while maintaining credibility. The Democratic party is headed down the path of Socialism, so I wouldn't expect to see any cuts in spending. If they have their way, they will gut defense budgets like they did under Clinton. However, I will not hold my breath that they will give that money back to the people in the form of decreased spending and tax cuts. That money will be spent on whatever social program they can come up with. I actually had to chuckle when I read that statement.

As for nuclear threat, perhaps your right. So, let's trade 10 million people for maybe 100,000 w/ some kind of dirty bomb or chemical agent. It doesn't matter. If you are a terrorist trying to hurt the US, what do you do?....you try to top yourself. I sit and listen to liberals talk and I hear their statements about 'responding' & 'handling' incidents. You hear Kerry talk about pre-9/11 attacks as nuisances. I have to sit here perplexed that we're so damn complacent in this situation. It's like no one can fathom that they could and probably will do it again.....and the next time they might be even more effective. We have NO reason to beleive this and it's dangerous to do so.

BigJohn - C'mon....like he's really going to answer that question on national TV. Anything he said in response to that would have been tattood on him for good. It was a loaded question w/ good intent, but unrealistic in that context. Like he said, history will judge his mistakes. It's not the role of a sitting President in a wartime environment to expose himself like that.

PM - I am well aware that my statement about treatment of women isn't the only reason we are in this mess. I know that our past actions in the region have a part in this mess. However, my intent was to draw a line and show the differences in ideology. Liberals want to blame the US for this whole mess because all of the past crap that we were involved with...(Iraq/Iran, Afghanistan, etc). However, perhaps because it's not PC to say it, you'll never hear them admit that part of this war is a clash between cultures....a clash between traditional/fundamentalist ISLAM and the American culture. Perhaps this is because it's hard for us to fathom committing these types of atrocities unless it's in response to direct actions. It's hard to fathom that part of this hatred is because we live in a free society that has appeal to those that are oppressed. To do so would be to admit that we are dealing with a group of extremist sociopathic nut-jobs that can't be negotiated with. To do so would be to admit that this is truly a war...one which will be with us for some time....one which our children will probably be fighting. In that context, I'll repeat my statement that I don't lose sleep over the thought of terrorists taking the eternal dirt nap at the hand of one of our soldiers or CIA agents.