“Is that not where question begins, I feeling of consistent betrayel? I suppose we’ll just wait and see if things are really “looking up”in Iraq.”

No, that is not where questions begin. “Feeling” (as I highlighted as the key word in your sentence) are fine, but they never lend an objective perception of the facts. If you use your “feelings” to examine any situation, sledom do they lead to facts and truth.

Questions begin from seveal places, but questiions that seek ti thruth usually are derived not from feelings but either curiosity of an objective need to know the facts. Allowing oneself to taint facts with too much “feeling” leads to a subjective rhetorical perception of the answers to said questions.

I have been contemplating this sort of issue (and the underlying thinking) for 30 years and I keep coming to the same conclusion: Liberalism is a form of mental illness. Seriously.

If a person tells you that they are going to hit you with a baseball bat as soon as they get their hands on it, do you let them get to it, or do you stop them? This was the situation with Saddam Hussein, he had used chemical weapons on his own people and was trying to reinstitute his programs. We found thousands of doses of nerve agent antidote. If he wasn’t planning on developing and using nerve agents, why would he spend his ill gotten gains from the corrupt oil for food program to purchase that antidote or the thousands of NEW chemical warfare protective suits we found? He had also sent hit squads to this country to try and assassinate the President. He was sending substantial sums of money to the families of suicide bombers, so to say he wasn’t supporting terrorists is patently false. He was also providing a government apartment and pension to the mastermind of the attack on the Achille Lauro that resulted in an elderly wheel chair bound American citizen named Leon Klinghofer being shot point blank in the chest and dumped overboard into the Mediterranean. You can NOT claim that he wasn’t supporting terrorism without being stupid or lying.

This is a war on Terrorism and those who support it. While the stockpiles of WMDs we were expecting were not found, Saddam was given adequate warning to move them. (thank you Senator Rockefeller) We did find adequate quantities of Chemical Weapons and enriched uranium to cause tens of thousands of deaths and trillions of dollars in damage if utilized properly. There was enough enriched uranium that the IAEA was angry that we removed it from Iraq because it was too dangerous to leave it there.

I do find it interesting that the ever so compassionate liberals are the ones who believe that its okay for tyrants to terrorize others as long as American interests are involved. But the US must send in the military when no American interests are involved. Basically they feel it’s okay to risk and lose American lives as long as the US has nothing to benefit from doing so. Don’t believe that? Why were US troops in Somalia? We didn’t have any interests there. Why are US troops STILL in Kosovo? We don’t have any real interests there. How fast do you think they’ll be demanding US military intervention in Darfur should we withdraw from Iraq? We have no interests there. Why do liberals feel that as long as there are US interests involved, we can’t possibly interfere with the internal human rights violations of the regime?

As Sean Hannity says, “Feel better now?”

Jerk jerk JERK!!!