Hi Mike,

Man, I really apologize.. I have just been swamped. I have time to answer a couple messages - more later (I hope <g>).

>>You bet! If it would stop another day where we lost 1,000,000,000,000 like in the days right after 9-11. Makes a LOT of economic sense, if that's your only angle.
>
>But hasn't it crossed your mind that throwing Iraq, all of the middle east, and much of the rest of the world into disarray over a personal grudge while create more havoc on the world econmoy and increase the anti-american sentiment building in the world, effectively provking more terrorism?

Well, of couse Mike. No offense but you're not the only one with a brain here. <g> I think that those folks who know far more than anyone hanging out here have certainly weighed the alternatives. I cannot in my wildest imagination think that this is an easy dcision whatsoever. It has to be horrible no matter what direction you go, so I think you and I would agree on that.

However, I fail to see that this is a "personal grudge" when some 3,000 Americans are dead, many ground into such fine powder that they were literally vaporized.

As far as anti-American sentiment goes I could care less. There's no doubt that many Americans are rude, loud and crass. I am personally very embarrassed by the filth that pours out of Hollywood and is poisoning the morals of many in this world. But, I am also quite proud of the funds and help we so willingly give - even to our stated enemies. Look at the Marshall Plan and how we rebuilt Europe after WWII for example. These same people who benefitted from our largesse are in many cases the same ones who now criticize us.

*shrug*

There's an old saying that goes something like this:"The higher up the ladder you go the more of your rear end they can see to shoot at." <g> We're just higher on the ladder in many cases.

This may come as a surprise to you but I do not think that just because we're the world's leading economic power that this makes us intrinsically better or wiser. Candidly I think we as a nation have all-too-often squandered our priviledges on a very self-centered materialistic binge. There's nothing intrinsically 'wrong' with having more but it seems to me that those who are compassionate will also be more willing to give.

The problem here is that some want to give other's money, not their own. <g>

>
>Considering we really never talked face to face with the perpetratrs, we have no clue why a religous movement attacked us, yet we feel that attacking a secular nation with no links to 9-11 is justified in the name of terror?

I disagree. We do "have a clue". Maybe you don't nut I sure do and as I said there are many folks far more knowledgeable in these matters than you or I. The links you say are not there most assuredly are. Perhaps you're confusing your desire that things not be as they are with what they, in fact, are? You're not confusing intentions with reality here are you?

>
>I hope Bush and Cheney make enough money out of the deal (and this is all about oil, don't fool yourself) that my life was worth it for you.

Yes.. The grand Liberal Consiracy theory - any theory will do - that denies the obvious fact that men are intrinsically evil. The logical fallacy is that it (this one about oil $) is exactly suggesting that someone is evil. It's a contradiction IMO.

Hey.. Why don't you go over to Iraq or Afghanistan and sing "Kum-By-Yah" or "Give Peace a Chance" and maybe you can usher in world peace. <g>

Wake up Mike! <s>