Dan,

>George, it's your right to disagree and interpret events as you see fit. I have no problem with that, and would still drink beer and talk NASCAR with you any time.

Well...only if you buy the first round< vbg >.

>I allowed myself to get sucked into an unwinnable arguement here, and now I'm bowing out. It's pretty clear to me that my views are in the minority here. That doesn't make you (plural) any more right, or me any more wrong. I believe we went there for the right reasons, that we need to stay until the job is done, and that the US has the right to defend itself and its citizens against threats real or potential, in the manner that the administration and our military sees fit. Ugly things happen in war, and that's what this is.

Do I agree with you that we went in for the right reasons? In the beginning, I would've. Now? No.

I wouldn't disagree about our right to defend ourselves for an instant. However, I would say that we seriously need to acknowledge why we would have to defend ourselves in the first place.

As far as I'm concerned, there are two things we need to do in the region. First, develop and implement an exit strategy from Iraq. Second, remove ourselves and our military bases from the region.

Does this mean we abandon Israel? Nope! It does mean that we become serious about bringing peace to the region. No pretention. No postering. No hidden agendas.

What this does mean, however, is we rid ourselves of foreign sources for energy.

Unfortunately, this is where the biggest problem is. Big Oil simply doesn't want to find new energy sources. Further, the government wants to protect the automakers.

I don't say this lightly. There are facts to back this up. In 1979 or '80, Brazil was importing 70% or more of the oil it consumed for cars. Today? The percentage is zero.

What did they do? To be real simple about it they mandated that they had to rid themselves of their dependence on oil.

As a result, they developed an alternative fuel source (etyhanol) and had car companies buy into making cars that run on it.

I don't know what the environmental impact would be, but I do know that if such an inititive was taken here, we wouldn't be where we are.

The problem isn't that the technology isn't available, but, for political means, it's not being utilized or developed.

>Goodbye, and thanks for all the fish.

Thank you, Douglas Addams.