At 05:58 PM 5/30/2003 EDT [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>A) What could possibly be more important than finding the weapons
>of mass destruction that were the entire justification for the
>invasion in the first place?
"John D. Giorgis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> responded
Off the top of my head:
-Toppling the regime of Saddam Hussein
-Restoring Civic Order
-Preventing Mass Civilian Casulaties
I see: my understanding is that you are saying that for Americans as
a whole, restoring civic order in Bagdad is more important than
preventing an anthrax or radiological bomb attack against Washington,
DC.
This is the crux of the question.
Many people I know think that restoring civic order in Bagdad is
important, but also think that for many Americans (but not necessarily
for all Americans or for others), it is more important to take steps
against another major terrorist attack, whether in Washington, DC, or
Omaha, Nebraska, or some place else.
And it is not clear to me that the trade off was `restoring civic
order in Bagdad' versus `protecting American'. I understand you to be
saying the US could not do both. I think the US is strong enough to
have both protected Americans against a threat the US president stated
he saw and restored civic order in Bagdad in a military occupation.
--
Robert J. Chassell Rattlesnake Enterprises
http://www.rattlesnake.com GnuPG Key ID: 004B4AC8
http://www.teak.cc [EMAIL PROTECTED]
_______________________________________________
http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
