Great thread which I enjoyed reading from the perspective of having put in twenty-five years in a territorial army reserve, which I somehow managed to reconcile with strong pacifist leanings. Also a lot of respect is due to the Vietnam vets in Mudcat, even though I believe that they were used in a tainted cause, shoring up an undemocratic regime which the US should never have supported.

Too many issues to take up here, but Bobert, in your last posting you're unfair to Clinton: Northern Ireland is a major achievement on his record, in terms of having brought about what looks like a lasting and peace-promoting resolution to the long history of that conflict - even if the body count (a "mere" 3,500, all of them victims in one way or another) doesn't make NI sound like the biggest show in town.

I think some of the abuse directed at Dubya (and i'm guilty too) is due to a worldwide sense of disbelief that someone as ... how shall I put it: intellectually challenged? ... could reach such a position of power and then wield it in such a childish manner. Part of the deal was supposed to be "we all know that the kid is dumb, but he has his dad's advisors around him". But after seeing Rumsfeld on TV mouthing military terms which he evidently didn't even understand himself, I began to get really worried. And the fact that a disproportionate number of these "advisors" seem to have gained whatever expertise they have in the oil industry makes me seriously wonder about how Government and international affairs are perceived in the US

I can see the arguments in favour of compulsory national (not military) service, but militarism at home and oil-based unilateralism in international affairs is a recipe for disaster.