From: "Gary Britt" 


"Geo."  wrote in message news:415eb115{at}w3.nls.net...
> "Gary Britt"  wrote in message
> news:415dc9b9$1{at}w3.nls.net...
>
> > Because it can't be PROVEN unless FRANCE, GERMANY, RUSSIA    *AGREE* its
> > been proven, and that means you can't defend the USA with pre-emptive
action
> > unless FRANCE, GERMANY, and RUSSIA give us permission.
>
> So what should be the penalty for failing to prove it to these countries,
then
> taking the pre-emptive
> action without their support which as expected results in the deaths of
> thousands and the costs of hundreds of billions of dollars, and then
having it
> proven by your own people that you were WRONG ?
>
> I say we fire the asshole and get someone else in the whitehouse.
>
> Geo.
>

Well that's your right to vote as you will.  For me, given 9/11, I want a
President who when faced with a tough choice comes down on the side of
protecting us and preventing that nuke from going off in NYC.  Saddam had
plenty and I mean PLENTY of chances to avoid having his country taken away
from him.  It was worth doing for many reasons having nothing to do with
finding WMD.  One of those main reasons is the next time Bush or another
strong President like Bush tells some tin pot dictator that they had better
comply with a UN resolution or the USA will take them out, THEY WILL KNOW
WHAT WILL HAPPEN IF THEY DON'T AND THE ODDS OF THEIR COMPLYING WITH UN
RESOLUTIONS AND DEMANDS HAS GROWN EXPONETIALLY AS A RESULT OF OUR PRESIDENT
BUSH HAVING THE COURAGE AND GOOD JUDGMENT TO PROTECT THE USA "WHATEVER
IT TAKES":

Gary

--- BBBS/NT v4.01 Flag-5