well, I can see there are a few differences about what "go after them and eliminate them" should involve....golly, Doug- with that kind of logic, a few of OUR well-placed WMDs could solve all the problems, huh?

I tried, with the 4 year old metaphor, to make the point that everyone can agree that hunting down and eliminating terrorists is a good idea, but that selectively invading countries just because we sorta vaguely suspect them and the head honcho is a baddie is NOT the way to do it.

Saddam was a nasty fellow, but so are 10-12 others in countries who like seeing Americans suffer...how many of those countries are we gonna invade? And how much are YOU willing to spend to do it? And----do you really believe that we CAN "go after them and eliminate them" this way, when every attack just turns more Muslims into willing terrorists? We are not fighting an old fashioned war where the enemy is in uniform and operating from known bases! Bill Clinton at least knew THAT much!