>>>>And Iraq is not the least bit necessary. Afghanistan was/is. But attempting to fight a worthless war in Iraq appears to have doomed any possibility of doing Afghanistan right.
>>>
>>>Got me confused here. Why was Afganistan necessary ?
>>>What does it mean in your opinion to do Afganistan right ?
>>
>>I'm not Perry, but here's one poit of view...
>>
>>Afghanistan, with its Taliban government, was "asked" to turn over Bin Laden and cohorts.
>>Bin Laden had admitted responsibility for the World Trade Center, Pentagon and other attack by then.
>>
>>The Taliban refused and were threatened with attack if they didn't comply.
>>They did not comply. So they were attacked, with the U.S. receiving moral support from the rest of the world. The objectives were to get Bin Laden, Drive the Taliban from power, and have a non-sectarian government that would allow more rights to people than the Taliban did.
>>
>>Unfortunately, it has now come to light that Iraq was the real objective of President Bush, so the idea of doing Afghanistan "right" (more freedoms for the people, (re)build schools, hospitals, government departments, etc.) was/is more words than anything.
>
>Hi John,
>[Thanx for popping inn, it is always pleasure reading yr posts :)]
>I know offical stories about 9/11 and consecutive happenings, but
>I don't take very well US gov. handling of events and ((aldough I can understand it) - high rate of aproval for war within US and UK.
>
>BTW, I did not get impression that whole World aproved these two wars.

Your impression is correct - very few countries of the world supported war with Iraq.
Not even the people of the UK. And the U.S. gave some small countries $$$ to declare 'support' for that war.
But I do think that virtually all of the world supported the war with Afghanistan once the government there refused to have Bin Laden turned over to the U.S.

I don't think that war solves anything, yet I supported it in the case of Afghanistan.