RE: POISON IN THE SYMPATHY WELL

I think this bears repeating:

"There is not, nor has there ever been, a single shred of evidence suggesting that Cindy Sheehan's son died to make Bush's oil buddies rich. Lest this come as some sort of shocking news, Bush's oil buddies were plenty rich before the war, and the suggestion Bush would send young American men and women to die in a fit of crony capitalism is so odious and farfetched it calls into question the intelligence and motives of anyone who accepts it as reality."

I have been opposed to our actions in Iraq since day one. However, my opposition is on grounds that there was never a reason to invade Iraq and that we have engaged in as much of a PR war as we have a military one since then. I say there was never a reason to invade Iraq because I utterly reject the so-called "Bush Doctrine." The concept of exporting democracy, especially at the point of a gun is utterly foreign to the principles of our founders and the idea of our republic. If we had not been so intent on tip-toeing around the UN and our so-called allies, we would simply have needed to take a strategic approach to Iraq rather than a tactical one. Our policy on Iraq was, and continues to be hypocritical. North Korea was and is a far more immediate threat and flaunts its pursuit and now possession of WMDs, yet we didn't find the need to invade them. Our liberal friends would indicate this to be evidence of the oil connection, but I beg to differ. Our policy toward North Korea is one of appeasement aimed at the PRC. In short, I find our actions in Iraq to be somewhat lazy.