But even if Kerry, Gore, Clinton or McCain were
President the last four years N. Korea and Iran would
still be where they are today. I believe only Bush
took Libya and Iraq off that list. So less countries
due to Bush.
--- Gruss Gott <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > Andy wrote:
> > All of which sounds like we are better off.
>
> This is the problem I'm pointing out - you and Sam
> are both making
> some arguments that *may* be true, but I have an
> easily defensible
> arguement that both Iran and North Korea are now
> more dangerous than
> they were in 2000.
>
> To answer Sam's question - no matter who's fault it
> is, it is, and
> that was the point of my post.
>
> So we seem to be down to this: you can't absolutely
> say that Iran and
> North Korea are less dangereous than in 2000. Many
> people, and at
> least some experts, are saying that they are more
> dangerous.
>
> All of this equals one thing: no definitive progress
> and maybe a
> reversal. Further, with out a doubt, our military
> is unable to deal
> with an Iraq sized problem were one to pop up in any
> country.
>
> All of that seems like backwards progress.
__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Read only the mail you want - Yahoo! Mail SpamGuard.
http://promotions.yahoo.com/new_mail
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~|
Purchase from House of Fusion, a Macromedia Authorized Affiliate and support the CF
community.
http://www.houseoffusion.com/banners/view.cfm?bannerid=35
Message: http://www.houseoffusion.com/lists.cfm/link=i:5:133483
Archives: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/threads.cfm/5
Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/lists.cfm/link=s:5
Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=89.70.5
Donations & Support: http://www.houseoffusion.com/tiny.cfm/54
