OK, OK, I'll throw the administration a major concession. They don't have to be cuter than Thai - just fewer ladyboys, fair enough? That's my final offer
Y'know, most liberals here really wouldn't have minded that Saddam is gone - or even the face of the president who did it. But you will find major differences in how these goals might have been achieved. If I say Bush is a stupid fartsucker for blowing off the UN and turning the US into world pariahs, well, that's a criticism of him personally, and his policy, but not a wish for Saddam to be back on his throne.
We don't go to war and let history sort out whether it was a good idea or not. We go to war because we have no other choice, or maybe because we calculate that the greater good will be served by fighting rather than not. Do we currently have reason to believe that a greater good is being served? That is the only relevant question. Maybe in the future Iraq and the Middle East will become a shining paradise, all because of this war. Is there any reason to believe that is the case? We don't send our soldiers to die in the hope that it might do some good, and later look back and decide whether it was worth it.
I agree with that. We don't send soldiers to die in the hope that we can do some good. We send soldiers because we strongly believe that our cause is right, and worth the sacrifice that the country is making. But it is possible that history might prove us wrong. I am not close minded to that possibility. Right now I believe that it is still too early to say that the sacrifice was not worthwhile, as some are trying to argue.