[Akira]

When it comes to national defence, I believe the president does what he sincerely believes in his heart is best for the American people.

I would like to agree, and I do agree on Iraq. But I don't care what this administration says, both Iran and N. Korea were (and are) bigger immediate threats. Iraq was low-hanging fruit. If the president lets the Iran and NK issues sit on the back-burner until after the election, I'm not sure he would have done what is best for the American people. Just in case the Dems win in 2004, do you want to leave Iran and NK to them?

[thepainster]

I shudder at the thought of leaving anything up to the Democraps.

In regards to you low hanging fruit analogy, I think that is too simplistic reasoning on why we went to Iraq first. I believe the real motivation is 1) Remove a dictator who is supplying the terrorists 2) Instill a democratic republic in a muslim country 3) Use Iraq as a central base for the USA so that we can influence the rest of the region.

Now that we are there we can exert a lot more pressure on Syria, Saudi Arabia and Iran.

I believe we are taking absolute best course of action in Iran. Iran will implode internally. With a little help from us, sooner rather than later.

NK is another story. Clinton got us in this mess. I have no idea of the best way to handle this one. But I still believe the trio of Bush, Cheny and Rummy are much better at dealing with the problem than say Gore, Liberman and Hillary.......I perish the thought.