"Dragged" into wars, Strick, "dragged". Drugs are things you take to treat illnesses or get high.

I understand that what you have described the USA as being (isolationist) is how you and many other ordinary Americans feel about the USA, but it's not how the rest of the world feels. The rest of the world sees the USA as the most interventionist and aggressive major power in recent history, and is very nervous indeed about it.

You're right that the USA doesn't have enough troops (foot soldiers, I mean) to take on another adventure...or to even stabilize Iraq effectively. That's true. But that doesn't stop the fools running your government from trying to bit off more than they can chew anyway.

Karl Rove, chief advisor to Mr Bush, decided some time ago that fighting short, decisive wars in small places was a good way to go, and would keep Mr Bush popular long enough to win the next election...and winning appears to be all that matters to Karl Rove. He has no moral stand on anything, but he plays to win.

Whether he turns out to be right about the next election remains to be seen. I think he may also have bitten off more than he can chew with the Afghan-Iraqui adventure.

Iraq did not attack the WTC, any more than the Spaniards blew up the Maine. Handy excuses result in "splendid little wars", but this one may not be so splendid in the long run. The Mexican incursions you mention were done by Pancho Villa, who cleverly enticed the USA into invading and attacking HIS bitter enemies in Mexico. The Americans went all the way to Mexico City and made life miserable for Villa's revolutionary opponents, but never got near Villa himself. How ironical. He even looked a lot like Saddam... :-)

- LH