Posted on 04/26/2006 5:48:20 AM PDT by SJackson
Forget neocons. This country's leaders soberly decided to invade Iraq to effect a long-overdue regime change, based on a pressing need to "drain the swamp," if possible, of dangerous regimes with the means and desire to acquire, develop, use weapons, and sponsor terrorism. This was a rational next step in dealings with one particular rogue state, and a step in a long war against rising danger emanating from the failed states of the Islamic Middle East.
President Bush has explained all of this, but you apparently don't feel that explanation is something you should engage.
Do you have a map handy? This country is in the heart of the Middle East. You want to argue that reasonable security is possible without reform in the Middle East, or that regional reform would have been possible with Saddam and sons in power for the next fifty years? Try.
Saddam's Iraq had forfeited its legitimacy by annexing Kuwait and then not living up to cease-fire agreements. It cannot be right that those agreements don't matter. The rule of chaos is not acceptable.
Hillary is going to run, but she is a horrible campaigner. Her numbers go down every time she opens her mouth. But she has the FBI files or their current generation and people know that she will use them.
Mitt might make a run. Biden is an idjet. Brownback is a candidate in his own mind only. Hagel would like to be president if he didn't have to work for it.
Now the real question is who will win?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.