>Here's a few thoughts I have on the issue. Hmm, elections in Afghanastan, elections in Iraq in January, no attacks in the US since 911, a homeland defense initiative (of which I have been an active participant), Sadam in prison, 75% of Al Queda dead or apprehended, Demolition of thousands of tons of armament in Iraq, with more to follow, etc, etc, etc ad nauseum. Yeah I feel safer.

Good points. Not.

- Elections in Afghanistan where a big chunk of the country is still under tribal/warlord conmtrol (not to mention Taliban/Al Qaeda still at large).
- Elections in Iraw (maybe), where a chunk of the country is controlled byinsurgents with a huge amount of/influx of foreign insurgents/terroists that weren't there before. Not to mention 380 tons (give or take) of high-explosives that we failed to protect/account for.
- 75% of Al Qaeda dead or apprehended? How can you (or the Whitehouse for that matter) back up those numbers? 75% of what? Let's see. We caught or killed 2 or 3 major guys. In the meantime, Bin Laden is at large. So is Al Sadr, Zarqawi and th9ousands upon thousands of mid-level and foot-soldiers (terrorists) in who-knows how many cells spread out all over the world, all at large. Nobody even has an accurate count. How's 3 or 4 major guys 75% of anything?

Yep. I feel safer already.


>No, we haven't been pushed around by anyone, but that's because we are militarily strong. Should we be unfortunate enough that Kerry were elected, we would have problems. He would try to turn our destiny over to the UN, or even worse - Canada! You missed the point!

Where does the insult to Canada come from? Where would they be handling our destiny? An tghe same with the UN for that matter. Kerry specifically said he will not do such a thing. He's as trustworthy on that issue as the other side. The same one that destroyed Bush's Sr. doctrine of creating a Coalition of Nations to come to the aid of the hlpless and attacked, to stop foreign, unprovoked aggresion and invasion and to send that message to the world. Remember Bush 41st and the 1991 Gulf War? And his son, in one act destroyed his father's doctrine and legacy, at the same time destroying our image worldwide. Just travel to a few places outside to the USA, and talk to some people (you have many non-US people here that would tell you). See how low what our image is right now.


[SNIP]
>You might try setting your sites a little higher. Here's a quote from Winston Churchill:
>"However beautiful the strategy, you should occasionally look at the results."
>and. . .
>"Arm yourselves, and be ye men of valour, and be in readiness for the conflict; for it is better for us to perish in battle than to look upon the outrage of our nation and our altar."
>
>Therein lies the difference in Republicans/conservatives and Democrats/liberals. Republicans are more results oriented. Democrats want to feel good about themselves, without regard to the outcome of a given situation.
>
>Your turn!<vbg>

I don't know where you get this last assertion/comparison between Republicans/Dmocrats from but it ain't accurate.
On top of that, you have to remember that we have three major sides here. Democrats, Republicans and the neoconservativces in power. The neocons (Bush, Rove & co.) are *not* Republicans. Reagan was a Republican. Teddy Roosevelt was a Republican. Bush 41st is a Republican. These warmongers are not. The republicans are fiscal conservaties. These people are not. Just look at the deficit.