Not so ridiculous, Teribus. When a country is under attack (i.e., 9/11) by an amorphous enemy with no fixed base and no way of guaranteeing safety from future attacks, that is a very difficult problem indeed. It can't be alleviated by deliberately antagonizing three countries with no established connection to our attackers (Bush's "axis of evil" speech on Jan. 29, 2002). That was, to say the very least, counterproductive. Then Bush zeroes in on Iraq, and then tries to convince everybody that all of our problems come from there. It doesn't take much imagination to figure out why he picked Iraq: oil for one, his father's unfinished business for another, and Iraq's strategic geo-political location for a third. With his obvious cobbling of the truth and his blatant war-mongering, he's managed to antagonize several countries who, were we concentrating on neutralizing terrorism as we rationally should be doing, would be our staunchest allies. I would sooner have a rabid pit-bull in charge of our foreign policy.

About North Korea, I don't share your faith in their taking a rational course if they really feel threatened. And Bush's attitude toward them, of late, is anything but conciliatory.

Don Firth