[SamuraiProgrammer]

Originally posted by dogscoff:
[QB]OK, samurai, I'm sorry I blew up in response to your statement (which could have been worded better, as you point out.)

No need to apologize, friend. (I hope I can call you that.) I was sincere when I said you had found a flaw in my thoughts.

My main source of frustration is directed at people who are happy to take our financial aid (there are precious few countries in the world that do not receive it in some fashion) but are unwilling to accept that maybe we know something about how things ought to be done.

If they don't want us exposing the world to our ideology of civil freedom or if they do not approve of our ideology, they should refuse to accept any aid we provide. Anything else is hypocritical.

The question as to whether Saddam is responsible for 9/11 is certainly slippery. I would say, that the world community's inability to make him 'play nice' has emboldened the likes of Osama Bin Laden to accomplish the tragic events of 9/11. If anyone disagrees with that, fine. I, however, believe it.

The security of the US (as well as the rest of 'Western Civilization') may well depend on our ability to make an example out of the 'thugs' of the world. Iraq, the PLO, and N. Korea are probably the top three candidates.

I still remember how that scant hours before the inauguration of Ronald Reagan, the Iranians released the hostages. (That is likely ancient history to many of you, but it is certainly pertinent.) Why? Because they were afraid we would kick their sorry butts.

If the people funding Osama Bin Laden were afraid we would kick their sorry butts, his funding would dry up. Not completely, but at least partially.

This entire excercise is not so much about actually kicking butt, but rather making sure the enemy believes we will. (Incidentally, that is the core of the doctrine that makes nuclear weapons useful as deterrent.)

This time, I am afraid, we will have to actually do it to prove we have the resolve.