To: geode00 who wrote (193259 ) 7/27/2006 5:02:31 AM From: Bilow Read Replies (3) | Respond to of 281500 Hi geode00; Re: "Except that Bush I didn't topple Saddam because he, or his advisors, understood the cost of such a thing. " The primary reasons that Bush I's advisors "understood the cost" was because that time was before (a) the liberation of Kuwait turned out to be much cheaper than expected, and (b) the easy part of the liberation of Afghanistan was still far in the future. You can't apply the logic of Bush I to Bush II, because these lessons were still in the future at the time. Because of the estimates of the cost, Bush I made an agreement with his allies that they would not march on to Baghdad. Bush's advisors told him that marching in would be expensive (remember, at the time this advise was given, the fight in Kuwait and Afghanistan were in the immediate and far future, respectively), and anyway, pushing Saddam out of Kuwait would cause Saddam to lose face and then lose his job anyway. The advisors were wrong about Saddam, and Bush II and advisors concluded that the earlier advisors were also wrong about the difficulty of occupying Iraq. Re: "Before this invasion, most of the world was not on our side hence the coalition of the bribed and coerced. " This is true, but the reason they were against us was not so much they knew that it would be a military disaster, so much as they felt that Saddam was not much of a threat, but that the US having control over all that oil was. Re: "Besides, what'a 31% approval rating if you own the voting machines? " Democrats are very insular people and don't know how much they are despised by the working classes in this country. As long as you guys keep blaming your electoral losses on cheating you will never get around to fixing the policies that piss off the working class. I voted for Bush twice, his dad twice more, and will vote Republican in the next election. -- Carl