Replies

Nice analysis. I've always thought that it's like we're in a bar or a parking lot and 10 guys want to take us on. The only way to handle the situation is to take out one guy, then the next, then the next, until all the others get scared and run away. Only point being is that you have got to start somewhere. You can't just sit there and do nothing, paralyzed with fear. And you can't fight everyone all at once. So you have to line 'em up and start taking them out, one by one by one. Afghanistan got to be first, Iraq got to be second, I guess we'll see who wants to be next, maybe Syria, maybe North Korea, maybe Saudi. I think the overriding message is however, is you have got to start somewhere, and you've got to take them on one by one by one. Don't think it matters *that* much what the order is, you've just got to take out the trash in calm, deliberate, methodical way. And that's what we are doing, and the world is already a safer place because of it.

"I think the overriding message is however, is you have got to start somewhere, and you've got to take them on one by one by one."

Reagan was known as the Great Communicator; perhaps Bush will be known as the Great Liberator. First Afghanistan, then Iraq. Next I think will be either Syria or France. Seriously, though, some of these counries may be liberated without direct intervention form the U.S., i.e. Iran and Saudi Arabia, but it will be the direct result of U.S. efforts in other places. I believe it will be crucial that we end up with stable governments in Iraq and Afghanistan that respect freedom and the rule of law. If that happens, dictators in Iran, Syria and elsewhere will continue to get very nervous.