Guest's post of 17-Sep-01 1:20pm makes no comment on the appropriateness of Bush's defense budget. It merely makes an observation regarding how one might've been able to foretell in advance the response President Bush was likely to pursue vis-a-vis an event such as the one that occurred 11-Sep-01.

The reader is left to decide for him/herself whether it is a valid observation. Actions the United States has yet to take will ultimately determine the shape and color of that response. Admittedly, it's a non sequitur to assume that a pro-defense stance automatically dictates a military counter-strike when one's country has been attacked.

Regardless, if the information troll supplied in his/her post of 17-Sep-01 1:55pm is correct, it would seem unlikely that, in the few months he's been in office, President Bush has had sufficient time to equip the nation's defenses to launch and sustain the kind of effort he's advocating to wipe out terrorism.

Perhaps the U.S. isn't ready for military action?