>Yes, it means we haven't caught the right people yet.

That you for that keen crystal ball insight. Can I kindly ask for the lottery numbers this weekend?

>Yes, amazing. Truly. It means we haven't caught the right people yet.

Yeah, I know. Just unlucky I guess.

>This was the administration's side point (of course the main one being about WMDs) right from the beginning. To quote South Park, Saddam was a "very naughty man" about whom something could be done (the UN thought so, too, I might add... right up until we went a little too cowboy for their collective taste) No flip-flop.

So the administration was completely wrong about the WMDs, yet they must be right about a Saddam, al Qaeda collaboration. Honestly, I love the logic.

>Hold on, now... is that a flip-flop?? Are you actually now saying we should have done something ourselves in 1993? Without anyone else? You know, like you're so upset about in Iraq????? BTW, I think we should have done something back then. And we should be involved in those areas you mentioned... as should the rest of the world's forces.

No, I'm saying you can't blame the rest of the world for not doing anything when we didn't do anything ourselves. It's called hypocrisy.

>And yes, I can certainly blame the rest of the world for waiting for our lead... and calling us out when we don't lead (See Eritrea and Boznia-Herzogovina in the beginning, et al). Then, when we decide to take action -- what a surprise -- they call us out for taking action.

Who called us out for taking action in Afghanistan?

>Yes, yes... your precious commission. In the words of Jon Stewart, "No workee." Time will tell. This argument cannot be won by either side yet. It will be years before we can look back and say definitively if Iraq as part of the global war on "Tara" made sense.

Anytime you want to present your evidence, I'm all eyes.