While that is true, the amount of people who expect America only to act when the world demands it is upsetting as well. For example, nobody wants America involved in Iraqi affairs, yet we're the one being called upon to work our USA magic and fix the middle east.

If the USA doesnt want to fix something, then they shouldn't get involved to begin with.

With what, Israel? It isn't ours to fix.

Neither was/is Iraq -- no matter how good our intentions. But we're there.

Well, considering how we left it previously, I think we had a responsibility.

The difference at that time, in my view, was that we and the rest of the coalition was reacting in an armed Iraqi incursion into another soverign country.

I think that the first President Bush made a serious error in pulling out before deposing Sadaam while world opinion was with us and our allies.

That wasn't the case this time.

I agree we should have taken Baghdad the first time, but considering foreign pressures and other concerns, I understand why they didn't. I still think they should have...However, I still think we're doing the right thing now. I hope that we will continue our work in Iraq, and not leave the country to civil war and terrorism. Despite the opposition in both the media and the public, there are great things happening. Even CNN lately cannot help but show Iraqi citizens proclaiming their appreciation for American action. I'm not under the misunderstanding that everyone wants us there, but the idea portrayed in the news that all Iraqis hate America is simply wrong. Despite the trend of opposing any action by the Bush administration, I think the proper continuation of efforts in Iraq will provide strong eventual results.

The reason Bush #1 didn't get rid of S. Hussein (sp?) was that there was no clear exit strategy. The reason Bush#2 went after said despot was because of an antempt made on the life of Bush#1.

RU, Unfortunately, I actually think you believe that. Sad world.

What's unfortunate? That we don't agree? That, in all likelihood, the information that we both used is probably, at least somewhat flawed? Its nothing to be sad about. Drink your namesake until you forget what Iraq is.

Oh, I'm sure some of the information we used was flawed. There is a difference between acknowledging that mistakes were made, and the conspiracy theorists who believe the administration blatently lied. I thought it was sad that you think we went to war for revenge regarding Bush Sr. The drinking idea, however, is a good one.

You know the real truth....I don't know what I believe anymore. I'm just plain disillusioned. I don't think the war was just for revenge, but I want to be. Its more justifible, or at least that would be A reason, instead of the whole WMD thing. Which I never believed. I beliebed that Iraq was showing everything they had either.

What's truly sad is that I don't care. I try to care. I used to care. But I just don't care anymore. I will still vote...federalist. But I don't think I'll ever care again.

And when you get to be my age, I think you will care less than you do now about politics in general. I cared the most when I was 13. I'm 24 and old an jaded and a little bitter because I can't even follow my own suggestion of drinking b/c I hurt my liver in college. :( Drink twice, one for me. And do whatever you can to keep yourself from becoming jaded.

Uh, your theory doesn't even pass Occam's Razor - the oil conspiracy theories pass much better under the Razor, and even THEY aren't all that solid or well documented . . .

It not a theory, purely wishful thinking on my part.

and also you're right, not much of anything seems to make sense anymore when i'm involved. Please check the lithium thread for more explanation.