wrote in message
...
On 27 Jun 2006 14:21:14 GMT, Scott Seidman
wrote:

wrote in news:gra2a2trn6ldp7ke40fl5klkjhf0f263mb@
4ax.com:

But by taking such a
position, one would tacitly acknowledge that he would be equally
responsible for enabling whatever good might occur.


And then the debate as to whether it could have been done better and with
less loss of life simple by either letting a contained Hussein goverment
wither and die or by actually running an effective war campaign with
enough
resources and a real international coalition behind it (as opposed to the
laughable "coalition of the Willing") could start.

It could start, I guess, but it wouldn't last long. Everything that's
ever been done by humans "_could_ have been done 'better,'" including
everything you yourself have ever done. OTOH, those things "_could_
have been done 'worse,'" too.

At this point, if there's a positive outcome, its almost an accident.

Well, maybe, but it's unfair to compare lesser countries to the US,
which suddenly and without warning or struggle internal or external,
came into existence as the perfect entity on June 21, 1788...

HTH,
R

He shoots....He scores!


Ric