That's fair. My point is that there have been plenty of people who come in and lob liberal talking points as if they were gospel.
There is no need to show such rudeness to new posters.
Indeed. I apologize for my rudeness.
KDD, you point to a good piece from USA Today (yes, that is empirical enough for me) regarding the different degrees that Islam as a religion has insinuated itself into the governments of Arabic nations.
I forsee a government in Iraq that is closer to Egypt than to Iran or Saudi Arabia - even with some measure of theocratic influence.
To hear some tell it, if Iraq's constitution doesn't mirror that of the US, then it's "wrong" and the Bush Administration has "failed." That's far from the truth -- as long as we can establish a stable, rational, democratically-elected and managed government (yes, I see Iran's present government as irrational, and definitely less than stable) that can be both a Middle Eastern power and a friend to the West, then I would say that we will have succeeded in our goal in Iraq.
There are some here, as I suggested, that would count this as failure, and they will present this as such. But contrary to what some liberals try to present, the charge is not to make Iraq the 51st state of the union. It is to free the people from tyranny and allow them to govern themselves without need to fear the next tyrant of the day.
We must be wary that events do not tarnish what should be a great legacy by our President.