Thomas Borchert wrote:

Mark,

We're ahead of the timetable that put Germany
and Japan back together again as hugely successful democracies.

I don't think that comparison is valid in any way. There are no
parallels to the situation.

Yep, a much higher percentage of the population hated us after the war
in Japan and Germany. Turned out pretty much OK though, huh?

.... or maybe you really DO think the world was a better place with
Saddam in power???

I think the world was a better place when the most powerful nation on
earth adhered to certain rules that had become standard between
civilized nations.

You didn't answer the question (but I know you can't because then
you'd have to admit that the outcome was worth the price).

The RULES that weren't adhered to were those that are supposed to
govern the UN. If the financial interests of France and Germany are
more important than enforcing UN resolutions, then the UN is no longer
the organization that it was chartered to be. International law
allows for nations to defend themselves, and if an agressive dictator
with admitted stockpiles of WMD, who is known to directly fund
terrorists against democratic countries, and with no love at all for
the US is NOTa threat, who is or will ever be until after the shooting
starts?

I can't see much of a difference for the world with Saddam missing (he
isn't, really, by the way). I am now absolutely certain - as most news
watchers - that Saddam didn't pose nearly the threat that some were led
to believe. There are no WMD, period.

Heh heh heh... I get a kick out of people who trust Saddam more than
GWB.

I am also certain that the path of actions the US took, if anything,
will provoke more and more terrible acts of terrorism than any of the
possible alternatives.

The teorrists stop when one of two things happens - they run out of
infidels to kill, or their support dries up. Now I dunno about you,
but I like the sound of the second option a lot better.

Mark Hickey