Not to get too off topic here, but I have to interject when I see such biased, uninformed opinions.
You're right - we play by our rules because they serve our best interests. Who's rules should we play by when we are attacked again?
Now, if you read outside the liberal media you will learn that, in fact, there is unrefuted evidence that Saddam did have a build up of weapons and spent the better part of the 12 years prior to the 2003 invasion evading UN inspectors and hiding/moving his stash. This is documented time and again. He thumbed his nose everytime at efforts to keep him in compliance. Numerous former Iraqi military, including a 2nd highest ranking Iraqi Air Force General, have confirmed this and even went as far as detailing what he moved and when he moved it and how he moved it. This is well, well documented. This has been provided to our media, but it doesn't serve their agenda of painting Iraq as nothing more than an exercise in bullying and senseless American bloodshed. Just because we didn't find any WMDs doesn't mean Iraq wasn't a threat. Many very prominent, popular Democrats over the previous 5 years have even stated as much. If you dig, you can find all this info. If you care to PM me I'll send you some unbiased, factual links.
As much as we hate to see our men and women killed and injured, they are fighting a just cause. And, based on GW Bush's vote in 11/04, it seems the country agreed.
And, yeah - we are the first and last country to use the "BOMB" because it, too, was warranted. Don't you remember what instigated it? Has that country ever attacked our interests again?
Just so we are clear, our man Bushy lost the popular vote. And if the polls are a true indication of how the Nation really feels, run that election today, and he will LOSE by a landslide against Micky Mouse.
Unrefuted evidence??? Please back that up with documented CIA evidence. I'm sure Congress would like to know for sure, to justify a valid reason why the hell we are in there. Don't give me the Right wing mumbo-jumbo horse shitt. China's a threat. North Korea is a threat. Pakistan's a threat. Syria's a threat. Venezuala's a threat, IRAN's a threat. So, should we invade? What's the provacation for war...a threat, spreading democracy in countries who run their government according to their autocrat religion???? Many view US as a threat...we have the bomb, we've used the bomb, what's your point?
What is our interest...world peace??? World Christianity? World Democracy? World Capitalism? Should US invade all countries who don't have free elections? Anyone interested in the genocide occuring in Darfur???
Let me preface...IRAQ did not attack the US. You're confused with the events of 9/11 terrorists and IRAQ. THere is no evidence to show that Saddam was in anyway responsible for the attacks on 9/11. Tyrant he was, and so are many other world leaders. So, that leaves the new argument that IRAQ needed to be democratic, and have free elections. Why? Who says so? What makes us right? It was just so necessary that 2,500 US soldiers had to die, 14,000 injured, and thousands of civilians. And IRAQ people did not invite us in.
To put this thread back on topic, what do you think will happen to summer travel if US is unsuccessful in diplomatic negotiations with IRAN, short of building them a nuclear power plant?
News today reported that oil prices fell on the news that US is in some kind of diplomatic talk with IRAN.
I'd love to know your thoughts on North Korea, are they next because of this threat?
Its more probable that most countries in the world in the next 20 years will have either built the bomb or have the capability. Does US have enough money to buy these countries off, or war power? At what price?
Don't have to answer...just thought provoking.