You may very well be right.
The political implications of treating this as a strictly military problem may lead to more lives lost than the currrent more restrained approach. The President must believe so.
I'm just haunted by the pattern that foreign governments are in greater danger by being friendly to America than by being hostile.
Those countries are in Catch-22 situations too. They have to make a choice between what they see as the lesser of two evils. In the not too distant past, the lesser of the evils was to side against the U.S. because they knew the U.S. leadership was chicken-Sh*& and wouldn't defend them. George Bush, as far as I can see right now, stands beside and behind our true allies. Those choosing against us know too that punishment will likely follow. While Dubya is POTUS, friends don't have to worry. But, they still have to realize that the tables could turn in 2008 and we could revert back to chicken-sh*&s if a DemocRAT becomes Commander-In-Chief.
If the DemocRATS are successful in dividing us (conservatives), they can conquer us as they did in both '92 and '96. That's the ONLY way Hellary will win...divide and conquer. I'm only one, but if I can help it, that won't happen.
Then stop believing in ghost stories. The Taliban was a hostile government to the U.S.
Now it's gone...reduced to fleeing into the mountains of Afghanistan, powerless to stop little Afghan girls from going to school or Afghan voters from voting in election after election.
Hussein's Ba'athists are likewise out of power now after being hostile to the U.S.
Hussein himself is in jail.
Libya, in contrast, saw the light and switched sides. Ghadafy thereby remains in power and serves as an example of what happens when you behave yourself. Ditto for Musharraf in Pakistan.
Yet somehow you've got the opposite picture in your head that somehow "haunts" you.