And certainly the potential for religious extremism has grown.
Let me see if I understand you correctly GST..
On one hand, when Bush warned about the "potential" for Saddam becoming a "growing threat" (and David Kay finds such evidence in Saddam's continued clandestined WMD R&D programs), he's a liar...
But when you warn all of us about the "potential threat" of looming Islamic militancy as a result of the overthrow of Saddam, we're supposed to just accept that as fact..
Ironic, isn't it? We're supposed to stake the national security of the US, as well as the rest of the world, on your scenario of a "potential threat"?
Where's your evidence that Islamic Militancy is proving to be more "potentiallly" inevitable than the equally "potential" inevitability of positive politico-economic opportunity and social equality?
After all, the IGC just passed an interim constitution that, for the first time I believe in a Muslim country, introduced a Bill of Rights similiar to our own, didn't it??
It would strike me that introducing the concept that human rights are inalienable, and are divinely bestowed upon mankind, is an incredibly positive step that has far more potential for disrupting Islamo-Fascism than egging it on..
But of course, you obviously will disagree.. Because, IMO, you're a closet racist who believes any attempt to introduce moderate and modern political and economic ideas to the Middle East is "in vain".. (you have yet to deny holding such a view, despite my enunciating my opinion of you previously)..
Or maybe you'll just disagree because you can't stand to see anyone but a Democrat conduct such a policy.. After all, the US is back in Haiti, essentially doing the SAME THING we're attempting to do in Iraq. And Aristide was installed back into power by the Clinton Administration, using military force.
That created considerable resentment then, which still remains in that country.
Hawk |
