Nicole: thanks for the additional message. Sorry you lost the first one.

I think you have an interesting take on the subject. It would never occur to me that Nader might, had he been elected, choose cabinet members that do not completely share his view of things. I have serious doubts Colin Powell would have joined his administration myself, because I believe he is more conservative than liberals would like to think. Your assessment that Gore had a strong understanding of foreign affairs is also in doubt in my opinion. Perhaps you could point out what he did during his years as a U. S. Senator, or as Vice President that leads you to this conculsion. I would be interested in knowing. He also is known in some circles as a great environmentalist, but in eight years as VP, there is little evidence he did anything other than right a book about the environment.

As to Gore trying diplomacy prior to bombs, I would question that too, because both he and President Clinton had ample provocation and opportunity to deal with Osama during the eight years they were in office. They did nothing. Oh, they may have used diplomacy of one sort of another, but it didn't prevent 9/11 did it?

Also, I'm not sure the American people would have stood for Gore to announce that he was going to try to enter into negotation with the Taliban to surrender Osama after the planes crashed into the WTC, the Pentagon, and Pennsylvania soil. I think GWB's response was exactly what the majority of the American public wanted to hear, and polls show the the majority approved of his using military force.

Your seeming defense of the Taliban is puzzeling to me. The Taliban was, by I believe most of the free world's measure, one of the most repressive in history. You present an argument that leans toward our being the bad guy because we threw them out of power. I wonder if the average woman in Afghanstan would agree with that POV.

DougR