Why did Bush deliberately attack the wrong country?

Emmanuel Gustin wrote:

These days, a
president with a majority in Congress can do almost whatever
he wants.

You need to pay much more attention to U.S. governmental activity if you want
to comment on it. That statement above is absurd unless the majority you're
talking about is 2/3, which the Republicans don't currently have.

Send Powell to the Middle East and he comes
back with a deal that isn't one and is shot to pieces the next day.

At least he tried. How come no Belgian officials head off to Isreal or
Palastine to solve the problem? Pretty easy to sit on the sidelines and
critique the players, try getting in the game.

and nobody can
object against the USA having a say commensurate with its
size and its efforts

Hogwash! The U.S. say is equal to that of Belgium, UK, Poland, The Czech
Republic, etc., etc. Our "say" is much, much smaller than our contribution.

The neocons are not above muttering dark threats and throwing
insults when someone in Europe dares to disagree with them.

I can't believe this "neo-con" thing has spread to Europe. I know it makes it
easier for you to *not* think about issues but you have to understand it makes
you look foolish. This "evil neo-con" thing is convenient for both
generalization and demonation, but since its an invention of people trying to
do this, you might want to stay away from the term in any discussion in which
you hope to come off as rational.

Washington should do well to remember that European heads
of government are accountable to their own electorate, and
despite whatever Tony Blair says, they would be seriously
negligent in their duty if they accepted foreign policy
dictates from the White House.

I'm glad you graps that, now remember it goes both ways.


BUFDRVR

"Stay on the bomb run boys, I'm gonna get those bomb doors open if it harelips
everyone on Bear Creek"