Kevin,

        You know in the time I've been here on this board reading posts and writing these long responses I'm sure some folks can't stand. I have learned that almost all the people here, no matter what their politcal leanings, are coming at things with a good heart. I really don't want to upset anyone and I try as hard as I can to understand other peoples perspective on things.

      Sometimes we've got on to topics that are too emotionally charged to debate really. The abortion issue, as an example. Now on that all we can do is agree to disagree because I have to respect your beliefs and there is no question in my mind or heart that you come from a very good place on that issue. So, if we argued till the end of time on it you'd still be 100% right and so would I. There's no place to go with that. I know it's probably an odd concept that two people could be at opposite ends of the spectrum on an issue and both of them are correct...but I think perhaps Mick may be able to explain that in one short sentence. Maybe even in one word.

        The thing is on this topic we're on now it's just beyond the realm of all understanding that with the obvious staring you in the face you side step it and look the other way. I can only take this as, "Well, I'm a Republican and I'm not going to admit the Republicans are wrong." because with the overflow of evidence to support what I said, you just went around it all by saying "It's absurd." case closed. Now, Lee was good enough to post a load of articles for you to peruse if you feel like it so I won't bother with that. Thanks Lee.

      The fact is Kevin that foreign policy is directly linked to our economy and since we now have the most "absurd" foreign policy in the history of our nation...well hell yeah it's gonna smack us right in the wallet.

"I don't see that we'll ever come close to agreeing on any of this.  It's such a stretch for you to insinuate that the sluggishness of our economy is tied to our foreign affairs.  That's absolutely absurd.  Show me some evidence please."

Well, you're right maybe, we won't agree if you continue to harbor the idea that our foreign policy does not effect our economy. Look, it's a world economy we're living with Kevin, our actions play a huge part in in because yeah the US is a giant cash cow, and what Bushco has done is destabalize the world market and I'm sure that's made loads of people happy. See they created a situation where there is a great deal of uncertainty and now unwillingness to invest in anything because they stirred up a hornets nest of terrorism, nation building, isolationism, and on and on and on...and they keep telling the planet to stay on alert because anything could be blown up at any time. They released another alert yesterday in fact. In the midst of this Bush is blundering around the globe giving the most hollow speeches imploring other nations to now come to our aid. Downright ugly really. Look, I can only imagine that you have this idealized view of the world where the US has no need of the rest of the planet and nothing invested in the in other nations around the globe when you see no relationship between foreign policy and our economy. Have you ever heard the term "global economy"? That's where we are at, it's not only Americans investing in America...there are loads of other countries that invest in our stock markets and have financial interests in the US. You do know this right?

"Bush came along and rather than continue along Clinton's path to nowhere he did what real leaders do and made some unpopular decisions.  Men and women continue to die as a result of those decisions...yes this is true but I'd be willing to bet that there has been much less death in Iraq in the past 2 months than at this time last year.  Does that mean anything?"

        Clinton, Clinton, Clinton. We're going to have to get used to this I'm afraid. Who do we have to thank for that? The Republicans. Clinton is going to grow in stature with each passing moment. Why? Because he was a two term president that came into office turned a deficit into a surplus and exited with the country in good shape. Now, the Bush crew took over, saw the surplus, decided to start spending, created a war to assist in blowing it as fast as they could, and turned our great country into a worldwide shameful embarrassment. Now, all that is pretty simplified I know, but that's the story in a nutshell.

   Now, we've got people running around saying, "Well, who cares if there really was no reason to attack Iraq. Saddam was bad and we got rid of him and we're bringing democracy to Iraq." Well this all comes back to US foreign policy and Bushco made a shocking and sudden change of the rules...something the majority of the world was against and outraged by...and something no administration had ever done before. When they write the history of this Bush will be known forever as the president who made the greatest foreign policy blunder in the history of our nation. It has cost us in every sense, money, blood, status...and unfortunately it's as plain as the nose on your face.

     All this plays into raising Clinton's status. Hey, as a person, to me the guy seemed like an asshole. I also can say I never voted for him. But the beauty of hindsight is now he looks like a hero and genius because Bush has turned his administration into such a destructive and divisive force that anyone looks like a god next to him. This isn't my fault or the Democrats. Bush and the Republicans did it to themselves and they have enriched the Clinton legacy to the point where during that debate the other day Gephardt, Lieberman, Kerry, and Clark may as well have genuflected each time they said his name. Ol' Rev. Al  caught that didn't he?

"I'm just curious and maybe I've asked this question before but I don't recall anybody ever answering it.  What do you feel after watching films such as Shindler's List or The Pianist?  Do you find yourself wondering how on earth civilized people sat on their hands while all this evilness was happening?  Would you have stepped forward and risked your life to stop it or would you have been content to maintain whatever illusion of life you'd come to enjoy?"

       I guess you're trying to make the point here that we had to go after Saddam because he was so bad. Why then when Gore and Bush were campaigning to get elected didn't either one of them make this a focus of their campaign rhetoric? Surely that would have swung votes their way to stand up and say "I'll vanquish the evil dictator in Iraq and put an end to his atrocities if I'm elected!" Ah, that didn't happen though did it? As a nation we've sat on our hands through atrocities, many times in fact. Yeah, this is a difficult issue no doubt about it but let's stick with the facts here for the moment and not what we'd like or wish we could do. The reason they gave for going after Iraq was not "Saddam is murdering and torturing his own people", it was in fact "They are an imminent threat to the US and the world due to their building and possessing WMD's and we need to get them before they get us."

     It's extemely disingenuous to try to promote Bush and friends as heros after the fact when you know and I know that a goodwill mission was never their intent. The US brought Saddam to power and allowed him to go about his merry way for years without taking him out and then finally we used the 9/11 attack to go get him.

    Of course it's a sad and painful thing to watch films like those and sad to see what happened...but also keep in mind most of us are aware of the facts behind the history of that situation and despite the self rightous emotions stirred up when we see a film...after watching "Shindler's List" how many people were walking out of the theatre saying "That's it we need to go get Saddam!"

 The fact is we'll never be able to stop these things before they happen and usually it's years too late by the time another nation intervenes. Many have to die before we go in...they are the sacrifice to save future generations. I know it's sad and horrible but if it was such a concern for Bushco why didn't they go and attack Saddam right away. Because the fact is, our government didn't care enough to stop it. Again, you're sort of idealizing the whole situation and while I certainly agree with your feelings and saving human life...I know in my heart it's not the way mankind or the world works.  And certainly not the way our government works.

"Did you agree with Clinton that it was a right decision to not take Bin Laden when he was offered to him?  I think the previous administration so lacked any leadership in the areas of foriegn affairs that when you finally see leadership it's a difficult thing to recognize."

       I think and this is purely hindsight now after 9/11, that any opportunity to rid us of Osama should have been taken. I'm not an ignorant person though Kevin so I'll just say I can recognize leadership when I see it. That being said Bush is certainly not the sort of leader that I'm interested in seeing in charge. Hitler was a leader too. So was Saddam. They were not what you'd want for a leader though were they. I'm not saying Bush is Hitler or Saddam, but he is severely flawed as leader. Not just him but his whole administration. I don't think they have any vision what so ever as to the sort of world they are creating with their policies. If you can't see the enormous errors they made I can only assume you shut them out because you prefer to believe so deeply in your party of choice. I'll point out here that I am not a Democrat.

"Don't worry though because I'm sure the Republicans will set us on the proper course once again only to be voted out of office just in time for a Democrat to take office, reap the benefits of the Republican's efforts and take credit for them."

         Look you're a good guy Kevin and I'm sure you mean well and these statements come from your heart. But honestly if a Democrat is elected and repairs our status in the world and turns around our economy...I'm sure you'll want to give credit to Bush for all this. I'm just not sure how you reason that out. I want want you want. Peace and a better world for everybody. We're not separated on that. I'll ask you a question. You really think that what Bush has done...basically promoted a policy of it's US vs THEM...and them is the rest of the world...and he's made that perfectly clear...this has improved our situation and status in the world? Keep in mind now before you answer that he's out now trying to win the UN over and get Germany and France back on our side. Only months ago we didn't need them according to his policy.

                                                                   Reg