Pat wrote: Let's imagine for a minute that the United States found WOMD and had the full support of England, France, German and Russia. We attempt to enforce a democratic governnment and in come the insurgents. What do you want to bet that every country save America would bolt out once they realize who they are fighting?

First fact is, we are only there for the oil Pat, wouldn't be one soldier their for any lesser reason than strategic energy supplies or the like. The democracy spiel was for the American rubes.

2) Democratic governments are not 'enforced', it's completely contrary to the concept unless you're talking National Socialist or Soviet Socialist forms of gun barrel democracy(sic).

3) So called Insurgents(sic), arrived after we, the US, preemptively invaded, get the order right.

4) we would sell all the countries of your imaginary scenario down the river in a heart beat if it suited; which may have something to do with their distancing themselves from us; perhaps we are widely viewed as a threat to world stability outside our borders.(Which suggests other higher priority questions Americans should probably be considering instead of Cindy Sheehan 24/7 or the next Michael Jackson distration news event(sic)),

5) nor need we imagine biological WMD's we supplied, though Saddam's regime was apparently technically incapable of maintaining them into the 21st century.

Pat wrote: If we leave what have we accomplished? Nada. How many lives will be spared if there is stabaliztion of the middle east?

We save American lives, we stop wasting American resources, and perhaps we make it more difficult for American agencies to defraud the American treasury of billions that are going missing via the Pentagon, Haliburton and the like.

Stabilization. Certainly not the 20-30K futures our invasion has already exacted, which is based on lies!, will not be spared. Why can't we mind our own business and let them sort out their own regional affairs? Who elected us to enforce stabilization? Oh yeah, our oil. Isn't enforcing stabilization an oximoron even in practice?

Pat wrote: Worse by fighting back? Do what no one else is willing to do. Where is the link that says the president is not optimistic that establishing a democracy is not possible

Worse by invading, nice try evading the origin. Maybe Europes egos aren't as out of control as Cheney, Rumsfeld and his crew. Or maybe they are satisfied to allow the OC Americans do the dirty work, I'm not certain. Although there may be a link, I heard the sound byte on television.

Funny thing, others who don't like what I write tell me the web can't be trusted. Besides Pat, you cannot even bring yourself to admit this President has lied to the American people time and again when it is indisputable. e.g., during the 2000 campaign he promised we weren't going to get involved in nation building if he was elected. And don't try to feed me the 9/11 forced his hand crapola. His team already had these plans.

It's beyond me how you can support this man, this government. You're suppose to be about truth setting you free and you're siding with these liars.

Be well brother!

Question: does your bible teach the concept of national responsibility/judgment?