[jpsb]

When our president declared that we will treat nations that harbor terrorists the same as terrorist, I cheered, "finally! the usa was going to kick middle east a$$, I've still not forgotten the humilation of Iran during Jimmy's presidency. In fact I was ready to reenlist the momnet Jimmy declared war on Iran. But Bush never put the country on a war footing, Yasir Arafat, the biggest terrorist of them all, was untouched, Lebenon and Palistine (the mothers of all terrorist states) were untouched. It seems to me that (other then Afganistan) rather then waging war on the real terrorist states (Palestine, Syria, Iran) Bush decided to settle old family business and take out Sadam, yea Sadam needed to go but Iraq was far from being a first tier terrorist state that title goes to the 3 I mentioned plus Chechian. Now the opportunity to go after the real treat is lost. Now we will have to wait for another big attack before we have the polictical capital nesscessary to regain our allies and will. Very sad that thousands of American will have to die AGAIN.

[gogeo]

That's one way to look at it.

Another is that unless you want to take on the world all at once, you pick and choose which battles you're going to fight first. Afghanistan and Iraq were easily justified and have created a modest domino effect.

I don't follow those who say W didn't put the nation on war footing. What else should have been done?