wrote in
:
OTOH, those things "_could_
have been done 'worse,'" too.


In the opinion of many on both sides of the aisle, not a whole hell of a
lot less worse. Somehow, we're arguing about how well each side's plan
is for digging us out of a monstrous ****up without having a discussion
about just how monstrous the ****up is--or whether the ****up needed to
occur at all.

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


I didn't think I was comparing Iraq to the US--I just think the whole
procedure could have gone a hell of alot smoother if the US were ready
for the aftermath of the invasion (you know, the aftermath predicted
fairly exactly by Bush I and his team!), and I believe I might have
expressed my whacked out opinion that there are plenty of financial
incentives to keep the cluster**** going -- so that's a pretty strange
rebuttal.

You do seem to have impressed our Alaskan buddy, though. Do you think I
could impress him too by counting to 22 without the help of a friend?


--
Scott
Reverse name to reply