"BUFDRVR" wrote in message
...
Syrian support for terrorists in Isreal and the PA has been overt for
decades
and a concern for the U.S. since 9/11 opened our eyes. It isn't that Syria
isn't a threat, its just that they're not as vulnerable and easy to deal
with
as Iraq was. I believe Syria's time is coming, whether Bush is office or
Kerry,
eventually Syrian ties to a terrorist organization that srtikes the U.S.
will
be discovered.

The sad truth is that even if we caught the Syrians red-handed turning small
pox virus over to Osama, there isn't much we could do about it. We don't
have the resources to do it right now and we've severly limited our options
in the future by destroying any credibility we used to have. Any claim by
the US that pre-emptive action is needed against Syria, Iran, Pakistan
(after the revolution), etc. is going to be dismissed as "that's what you
claimed last time."

Add in the looting of Iraqi nuclear
material
(http://www.usatoday.com/news/opinion...5-wagner_x.htm)
and it is a little hard to see how invading Iraq made us safer.

It did two things. 1.)Eliminated a potential or actual supporter of
terrorists
and 2.) got U.S. forces out of Saudi Arabia, a major issue with Muslim
fundamentalists.

Offhand, I'd say Muslim fundamentalists are far more upset with the US now,
given out actions in Iraq, than they were by our forces in Saudi Arabia.
Which is a false argument, anyhow: we could have withdrawn our forces from
Saudi Arabia any time we wanted to. Given Iraq's great success against Iran
(with it had a far stronger army), I'd be really surprised if they could
accomplish much against Saudi Arabia given US air support.