>Tracy,
>
>>How is this associated with the U.S. government? Where is the tie between the two?
>
>By doing a Google search, this came:
>
>"There is little question about the source of PNAC's influence. When it was founded in 1997 by two prominent neoconservatives, William Kristol and Robert Kagan, its charter, which called for a U.S. strategy of global pre-eminence based on military power, was signed by men who would become the most influential hawks in the Bush administration, including Cheney, Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld, Deputy Defense Secretary Paul Wolfowitz, Under Secretary of State for Arms Control and International Security John Bolton, and Cheney's influential national security adviser, I. Lewis Libby."
>
>http://www.foreignpolicy-infocus.org/commentary/2003/0303pnacletter_body.html
>
>Think you can find some more, better suited to your needs of information.
>
>>Based upon your premise above I could declare you a murderer because there is no proof that you WILL NOT DO IT IN THE FUTURE even though YOU HAVE NEVER DONE IT IN THE PAST.
>
>No, you cannot declare me a murderer. You can ONLY declare that "I may kill in the future", even thou there is no evidences I've done that in the past.
>
>>As to the next paragraph where you ask why not take over from now on? I thought you had the answers, not me.
>
>I have not the answers, I just followed the same line of thinking of the above's sentence (the murderer's) logic.
>
>>I see no proof in our history to justify your fear.
>
>Tracy, my point is that what determines what a government will do in the future has nothing to do with what OTHER governments have done in the past. Of course I could realize A. Lincoln doing such thing! AFAIK, Mr Lincoln IS NOT currently the president of the US.
>
>>I'll discuss it again when and if America ever takes over a country...
>
>I sincerelly hope that (our) discussion will never occur... :)
>
>Fernando

Fernando;

As far as a future administration is concerned, I would not be so bold as to say what I thought would occur.

Concerning changes in administrations, a problem with the Israeli-Palestinian issue has been the change of administrations (frequent) by the Israelis. One administration made progress towards peace only to be undone by future administrations. Too bad there cannot be continuity towards settling problems from one administration to another regardless of which country or countries we are discussing.

Tom