On the Dennis Miller thread it was mentioned that we had more to fear from the USSR than we do from the terrorists.
This can surely be debated. I believe it was Ted Soronsen from JFKs administration who said that Saddam Hussein was a bigger threat. Unlike the Soviets, who had a highly industrialized nation, most countries in the Middle East have little. You put a mad man in front of little to lose and why shouldn't he go "all in"
With a war on terror, we have much more to lose. It can be debated all day and night about the war in Iraq. If the table stakes are not known, the debate is not meaningful. I think we are guessing, at best, to say we are sure what the stakes are. JMO
This can surely be debated. I believe it was Ted Soronsen from JFKs administration who said that Saddam Hussein was a bigger threat. Unlike the Soviets, who had a highly industrialized nation, most countries in the Middle East have little. You put a mad man in front of little to lose and why shouldn't he go "all in"
With a war on terror, we have much more to lose. It can be debated all day and night about the war in Iraq. If the table stakes are not known, the debate is not meaningful. I think we are guessing, at best, to say we are sure what the stakes are. JMO
