http://firstread.msnbc.msn.com/archive/2007/01/31/45915.aspx Pelosi and members of her recent delegation to Iraq and Afghanistan plan to go to the White House later today to brief the President on their trip.  Roll Call raises the possibility that even though House Democrats will have a limited Q+A sessionen-USCommunityServer 2.0 (Build: 60608.1)http://firstread.msnbc.msn.com/archive/2007/01/31/45915.aspx#45941Wed, 31 Jan 2007 14:18:32 GMT8a5d2dbc-a0e4-4c7a-979f-3188051f228e:45941mikeeg,abdn,waSo the right wing extremist war mongers have a raucous debate with right wing flip floppers, I find that interresting.http://firstread.msnbc.msn.com/archive/2007/01/31/45915.aspx#46044Wed, 31 Jan 2007 15:26:08 GMT8a5d2dbc-a0e4-4c7a-979f-3188051f228e:46044Robert Catalano, Salem, OR"The raucous debate ended when Vice-President Cheney glared down at Senate Republicans and said, 'To anyone who disagrees with me: you saw what we did to Saddam when he defied me." - - Independent Part News Servicehttp://firstread.msnbc.msn.com/archive/2007/01/31/45915.aspx#46065Wed, 31 Jan 2007 15:37:02 GMT8a5d2dbc-a0e4-4c7a-979f-3188051f228e:46065Bob. Lipsett Sr. North Attleboro, MA. 02760-4388Why is everyone so afraid to take off the kid gloves in regard to this commander-in-chief. Yesterday at Peoria, IL. at the catapiliar plant he jumped on to a D-10 tractor and said I'm going to "crank this sucker up". While doing what he knows best of not understanding the operation of that D-10 earth mover he almost ran over people and laught about burying the press corp. This Man is fit to be President????? I think not. Why are these unbinding resolution that MIGHT hurt our troops and emboden our enemy being treated with kid gloves, doesn't fact that 3,079 dead military matter and even after 1,368 days since May 1 2003 is this "MISSION ACCOMPLISHED"? It is time for a further look at Cheney/Bush plan before Sept. 11, 2001 and why Sept. 11, 2001 World Trade Center was allowed to happen. How did Judy Miller get classified information out of the Pentagon to publish the drum beats of war that the Pentagon wanted us to believe. Valeria Plame name was really should have been the news along with Judy Millers of the New York Times article about Saddam Hussein stock piles of WMD, that were promoted by Ahmad Chalibi. And to boot Lt. Gen. David Petraus noted while flying into Baghdad over the same route that Tommy Franks took in order to dispose of Saddam Hussein, In that fly over in spring of 2003 he noted to others about the mounds of dirt below and commented that they were Ammo Dumps unguarded and they would be use by the shiiti against the US military. That was nearly four (4) years ago, why didn't he do something about them then. Bob. Lipsett Sr. North Attleboro, MA 02760-4388 (508)761-5103 twmutm@hotmail.comhttp://firstread.msnbc.msn.com/archive/2007/01/31/45915.aspx#46068Wed, 31 Jan 2007 15:37:54 GMT8a5d2dbc-a0e4-4c7a-979f-3188051f228e:46068kenisn't it interesting though that the military brass have lunch with the republicans. probably chickenhawk repubs have been giving the army military advice; and the military has been giving the repubs election advice.http://firstread.msnbc.msn.com/archive/2007/01/31/45915.aspx#46125Wed, 31 Jan 2007 16:12:54 GMT8a5d2dbc-a0e4-4c7a-979f-3188051f228e:46125Mark--MDKen, What I found interesting is that by asking Gen. Casey why he stuck with a "failed battle plan," these hacks are still clinging to the assumption that there was any possibility of there being a successful battle plan for an invasion and occupation of a sovereign nation!http://firstread.msnbc.msn.com/archive/2007/01/31/45915.aspx#46126Wed, 31 Jan 2007 16:13:41 GMT8a5d2dbc-a0e4-4c7a-979f-3188051f228e:46126mikeeg,abdn,waGo to Impeachbush.org let america speak very LOUDLY.http://firstread.msnbc.msn.com/archive/2007/01/31/45915.aspx#46155Wed, 31 Jan 2007 16:39:29 GMT8a5d2dbc-a0e4-4c7a-979f-3188051f228e:46155.Bob. Lipsett Jr. - glad you asked, maybe my opinion might be of value: the presidency of the United States of America has been taken over in a criminal coup de tat - if even one of those generals took their oath of service seriously they would be forced to arrest bush. Regarding his behaviour: he's a psycho chicken. Ques quo c'est. Think about it - for a puppet leader of the greatest, most powerful country in history, you don't want someone who thinks real clearly - you must of noticed how confused he always seems. The other day when he was rejecting all notions but "the surge" (not to be confused with "the wave") he started to defend his plan, then started to drift off, and ended up looking at the floor and saying some totally nonsensical mumble about it being his job to "pick a plan that didn't end in catastrophe." (Uh -huh.) "I've thought about long and hard." he told Lehrer. (Well good for you, little fella! Thinking hard! And long! I dare say you might be starting to take the situation seriously! Good for you! Too bad you didn't think long and hard 4 years ago.) He's perfect - born rich and scared shitless of losing that priveledge, compromised by making millions from a bankrupt company that the SEC decided really didn't need investigation (it was the purchasing of GWB), his daddy was in business with a Panamanian strong man until he crossed him, his grandaddy did business with the Third Reich! During the war! He's an untreated alcoholic and drug addict, he has a messianic complex and a HUGELY inflated sense of his place in history as well as a HUGELY inflated notion of his own abilities yet somewhere in that Connecticut Yankee's head is the truth that he really isn't capable of running this country, so he gladly accepts "advice" from people like Darth Vadar's older, meaner brother, Dick. The conspiracy could not have made a better choice - you say yourself he got on a piece of equipment he couldn't operate and nearly ran some people down, AND DIDN'T CARE! We all need to worry that the El Presidente Jorge doesn't take an interest in home dentistry! http://firstread.msnbc.msn.com/archive/2007/01/31/45915.aspx#46157Wed, 31 Jan 2007 16:40:42 GMT8a5d2dbc-a0e4-4c7a-979f-3188051f228e:46157ex-marine,vietvetThe defense dept. Inspecter Generals Office polled roughly 1,100 sevice members and found they weren't always adequately equipped for their missions. The troops were inerviewed in iraq and afgan. last May and June. The reort found the U.S. Central Command and the Armys internal equipment controls inadequate and recommended improvements.(gee do ya think)http://firstread.msnbc.msn.com/archive/2007/01/31/45915.aspx#46181Wed, 31 Jan 2007 16:50:36 GMT8a5d2dbc-a0e4-4c7a-979f-3188051f228e:46181Seattle SueBob.Lipsett Sr.==Welcome to this site.http://firstread.msnbc.msn.com/archive/2007/01/31/45915.aspx#46269Wed, 31 Jan 2007 17:31:45 GMT8a5d2dbc-a0e4-4c7a-979f-3188051f228e:46269ex-marine,vietvetPentagon announces they will stop selling f-14 parts,cause of concern about iran(only country using f-14) and these are the guys giving orders to our troops in 2 wars(soon to be 3 wars), am I the only one or do others see a major problem here?http://firstread.msnbc.msn.com/archive/2007/01/31/45915.aspx#46276Wed, 31 Jan 2007 17:35:07 GMT8a5d2dbc-a0e4-4c7a-979f-3188051f228e:46276kim, crofton, mdI believe the administration's (Rove's) policy of "divide and conquer" which has worked well for them in the past, is being used again, this time to defeat Biden's non-binding resolution. Its allies in the Senate have been instructed to come up with several different resolutions, to keep Biden from mustering enough support from Senate Republicans. When the Senate fails to get enough votes to pass any of them, the Democrats will look weak and ineffective in their anti-surge stance. That is why Cheney was there.http://firstread.msnbc.msn.com/archive/2007/01/31/45915.aspx#46294Wed, 31 Jan 2007 17:44:49 GMT8a5d2dbc-a0e4-4c7a-979f-3188051f228e:46294Scott BoothWhatis amazing to me is this President can endorse some to be the military leader in Iraq or the armed force's and the Senate Say's, "oh yes this guy has great qualification, He'll do a fine job". With all the education that is in the senate, and in all their supremacy, they don't have the common sense to know that this guy is just another YES guy for the President, doing just exactly what Bush wants. When he stops doing Bush's bidding, he's gone, than Bush recommend someone else and it the same thing all over again. What a bunch over paid politicians that do not have enough common sense to come inside out of the rain.http://firstread.msnbc.msn.com/archive/2007/01/31/45915.aspx#46302Wed, 31 Jan 2007 17:49:09 GMT8a5d2dbc-a0e4-4c7a-979f-3188051f228e:46302ex-marine,vietvetI see Adm. Fallon says it might be time to "redefine the goals" for iraq, I thought that was flip floppin bushes job, if they had stuck to the first goals in iraq the troops would all be home now.http://firstread.msnbc.msn.com/archive/2007/01/31/45915.aspx#46315Wed, 31 Jan 2007 17:58:30 GMT8a5d2dbc-a0e4-4c7a-979f-3188051f228e:46315Barbara French Trabuco Canyon CAThis president has already placed a strangle-hold on our country........Osama Bin Laden could never have accomplished as much damage to America as he has.http://firstread.msnbc.msn.com/archive/2007/01/31/45915.aspx#46341Wed, 31 Jan 2007 18:12:36 GMT8a5d2dbc-a0e4-4c7a-979f-3188051f228e:46341Seattle SueI wonder what is up. Just heard Gonzales is going to turn over secret wire tap documents. Something is going on here. Maybe just a CYA move?http://firstread.msnbc.msn.com/archive/2007/01/31/45915.aspx#46378Wed, 31 Jan 2007 18:37:32 GMT8a5d2dbc-a0e4-4c7a-979f-3188051f228e:46378Darren Pope, SCWhat's amazing to me is that the democrat controlled senate can quietly unanimously vote for Gen. Patreaus to lead our troops in Iraq, and then publicly say his plan won't work and the troop "surge" will have little effect. Patreaus literally wrote the book on counter-insurgency, let's give his plan a chnce before we start waving the white flag.http://firstread.msnbc.msn.com/archive/2007/01/31/45915.aspx#46387Wed, 31 Jan 2007 18:42:57 GMT8a5d2dbc-a0e4-4c7a-979f-3188051f228e:46387Darren Pope, SCMark, are you saying that NO invasion can be successful? Really? Hmmm. So I guees we should've just let Sadaam continue to flout UN resolutions, continue to violate the cease fire, continue to murder, maim, torture, and rape Iraqis, and go on with his plan to develope nukes. http://firstread.msnbc.msn.com/archive/2007/01/31/45915.aspx#46401Wed, 31 Jan 2007 18:53:46 GMT8a5d2dbc-a0e4-4c7a-979f-3188051f228e:46401rickDarren, am I correct to infer from your post that you are a supporter of the United Nations? Since North Korea, a charter member of the axis of evil, meets your criteria, are you in favor of invading them immediately?http://firstread.msnbc.msn.com/archive/2007/01/31/45915.aspx#46413Wed, 31 Jan 2007 18:58:10 GMT8a5d2dbc-a0e4-4c7a-979f-3188051f228e:46413Steve Turner Cedar Falls Iowaken. The chickenhawks especially like the after-lunch showers they get to take with the brass.http://firstread.msnbc.msn.com/archive/2007/01/31/45915.aspx#46432Wed, 31 Jan 2007 19:07:27 GMT8a5d2dbc-a0e4-4c7a-979f-3188051f228e:46432Les Hughes, ArizonaBush has repeatedly lied to the American People on Iraq and our own economy related issues like katrina, taxes, education, enviornment. I believe that Bush or even Cheney can not be trusted on any issue from this time forward.http://firstread.msnbc.msn.com/archive/2007/01/31/45915.aspx#46436Wed, 31 Jan 2007 19:10:15 GMT8a5d2dbc-a0e4-4c7a-979f-3188051f228e:46436Seattle SueDarren Pope==How many other countries are run by terrible men that continue to murder,maim,torture and rape their citizens? Are we to go to war with all of them? North Korea,Durfur, China, you pick a country. You can talk until you are blue in the face,but I believe that Bush and crew lied to me as to why we had to attack Iraq. Now if I didn't feel as I had been lied to, then maybe I could support Bush.http://firstread.msnbc.msn.com/archive/2007/01/31/45915.aspx#46467Wed, 31 Jan 2007 19:28:38 GMT8a5d2dbc-a0e4-4c7a-979f-3188051f228e:46467Rufus Gibbons, Kennett, Mo.Darren, Sadam was not a threat to the American people, he could have been toppled years ago but most Presidents since Truman have played Iran and Iraq against each other to keep either one from becoming too strong. Only someone with little or no knowledge of the Middle East would go into traq and set up another fundamentalist Shia government that goes to the same church as the Iranians. http://firstread.msnbc.msn.com/archive/2007/01/31/45915.aspx#46476Wed, 31 Jan 2007 19:34:08 GMT8a5d2dbc-a0e4-4c7a-979f-3188051f228e:46476CJDarren I agree with you that the Dems are showing a weak hand in dealing with the administration. The simple fact is they would be blamed for losing the war if they seriously made an effort to end it (which ironically at this point would be the moraly correct thing to do). So you will see this song and dance play out until it Iraq comes to it's inevitable conclusion...ethnic cleansing of Sunni's on a scale never seen even during Sadaam's era, an emboldened Iran, and the rise of Al Sadr. That is the result of Bush's war.http://firstread.msnbc.msn.com/archive/2007/01/31/45915.aspx#46488Wed, 31 Jan 2007 19:38:10 GMT8a5d2dbc-a0e4-4c7a-979f-3188051f228e:46488Robert Catalano,Salem, ORDarren, Israel has flouted numerous UN regulations as well and would have been guilty of defying more if the lock-step US government hadn't opposed those sanctions. Is it only us and our allies who are allowed to defy the UN?http://firstread.msnbc.msn.com/archive/2007/01/31/45915.aspx#46495Wed, 31 Jan 2007 19:44:25 GMT8a5d2dbc-a0e4-4c7a-979f-3188051f228e:46495MK, MODarren you are correct Sadaam is gone so it would be wise to get out and let the Iraqi's fight they're civil war by themselves, we don't need to kill anymore American kids fighting a religous war that can't be won.http://firstread.msnbc.msn.com/archive/2007/01/31/45915.aspx#46515Wed, 31 Jan 2007 19:58:39 GMT8a5d2dbc-a0e4-4c7a-979f-3188051f228e:46515The Edge, Macon GADarren, you're right, we couldn't let Saddam "continue to flout UN resolutions, continue to violate the cease fire, continue to murder, maim, torture, and rape Iraqis, and go on with his plan to develop nukes" GWB had to get us some of that action too.....but he doesn't need to develop nukes, just wave ours in Iran's face. Takes one to know one I guess?http://firstread.msnbc.msn.com/archive/2007/01/31/45915.aspx#46516Wed, 31 Jan 2007 20:00:09 GMT8a5d2dbc-a0e4-4c7a-979f-3188051f228e:46516John DoeYup , Darren - "All we are saaayyyingggg, is give war a chance." You are easily amazed. Why shouldn't the Congress give monkey boy the general he wants? The right wingers would be happier if COngress insisted on Capt Kangaroo leading THE SURGE so they could whine ad nauseum about how COngress derailed THE SURGE (because the right wing policy fascists knows this isn't going to make any difference). But this way, the just-around-the-corner glorious victory will belong entirely to bush - isn't that great?http://firstread.msnbc.msn.com/archive/2007/01/31/45915.aspx#46522Wed, 31 Jan 2007 20:01:34 GMT8a5d2dbc-a0e4-4c7a-979f-3188051f228e:46522Greg, Spokane, WADarren, Did you see Saddam's plan to develop nukes? Or did Rush tell you that? I am certain that in certain parts of the country certainty is dead. Certainly, Darren you MUST have noticed that Saddam had a certain control over his people that Bush certainly hasn't figgerd out.http://firstread.msnbc.msn.com/archive/2007/01/31/45915.aspx#46584Wed, 31 Jan 2007 20:43:35 GMT8a5d2dbc-a0e4-4c7a-979f-3188051f228e:46584spunky munkyGreg, Greg, Greg the whole world was in agreement beore the war that Sadaam had wmd's and was trying to develop nukes. Sadaam had control over his people because he was a homicidal manaic. Now you as I'm certain are a liberal "do as I say not as I do" should be the first one not to want other people suffer? But you really don't care do you all you do is hate Bush. You and your ilk want us to lose this war you are unpatriotic and you are rotting America from the inside out. I'm quite certain of what that makes you. http://firstread.msnbc.msn.com/archive/2007/01/31/45915.aspx#46606Wed, 31 Jan 2007 20:59:51 GMT8a5d2dbc-a0e4-4c7a-979f-3188051f228e:46606Mark--MDDarren, that's not what I said--I said "invasion *and* occupation"--the occupied will always prevail unless they are completely annhilated, which would constitute genocide, something which you surely wouldn't advocate. The occupied have time and will on their side, and they aren't going anywhere. No one willfully acquiesces to occupation. Colonization, annexation, etc., have worked on some levels in the past because there usually are accompanying developmental benefits and some sense of not living with a sword hanging over their head. But occupations--please point to any case where an invading army in a foreign country ultimately prevailed. I'm not saying that in jest--there may be some that I'm not aware of. Don't forget that we ordered the inspectors out of the country for fear that they would report what we didn't want to hear--that he *was* in compliance. And the cease-fire--well, if we had foreign warplanes flying over our airspace, would you advocate that they not be shot down? Finally, his "plan to develop nukes" is laughable. Every report I've seen indicates that he did not have that capability.http://firstread.msnbc.msn.com/archive/2007/01/31/45915.aspx#46634Wed, 31 Jan 2007 21:15:09 GMT8a5d2dbc-a0e4-4c7a-979f-3188051f228e:46634not your flunky monkey"the whole world was in agreement beore the war that Sadaam had wmd's and was trying to develop nukes. That's simply a lie, Karl.http://firstread.msnbc.msn.com/archive/2007/01/31/45915.aspx#46637Wed, 31 Jan 2007 21:15:41 GMT8a5d2dbc-a0e4-4c7a-979f-3188051f228e:46637Jane Q.CitizenNUKE, NUKE, NUKE!!!!!!!!!! Turn the Middle East into a big glowing parking lot. Problem solved and GWB may be able to salvage his reputation.http://firstread.msnbc.msn.com/archive/2007/01/31/45915.aspx#46692Wed, 31 Jan 2007 21:57:59 GMT8a5d2dbc-a0e4-4c7a-979f-3188051f228e:46692spunky munkyflunky monkey No...no it's not a lie the truth hurts doesn't it! http://firstread.msnbc.msn.com/archive/2007/01/31/45915.aspx#46753Wed, 31 Jan 2007 23:02:15 GMT8a5d2dbc-a0e4-4c7a-979f-3188051f228e:46753Kato in Des Moines, IowaSorry spunky munky, but I can't let you get away with saying "the whole world was in agreement before the war that Saddam had wmd's and was trying to develop nukes." You obviously didn't watch or listen to the debate that raged in the UN security counsel when the US was trying to muster the votes to go to war. The French and German foreign ministers led the opposition to the United States resolution. Bottom line, neither Colin Powell nor President Bush could convince enough members on the security counsel to go along with the US. As a consequence the US and its "coalition of the willing" sidestepped the UN and invaded Iraq anyway. Nice try at revisionist history. http://firstread.msnbc.msn.com/archive/2007/01/31/45915.aspx#47093Thu, 01 Feb 2007 05:12:43 GMT8a5d2dbc-a0e4-4c7a-979f-3188051f228e:47093Glad I don't have kidsspunky munkey - what's the point of telling a lie like that? Only the brown shirts go for it, and they wouldn't care if Bush had a baby on a pitch fork. I must say, though, "spunky munky" oozes credibility - that's probably how George spells it.http://firstread.msnbc.msn.com/archive/2007/01/31/45915.aspx#47245Thu, 01 Feb 2007 13:44:29 GMT8a5d2dbc-a0e4-4c7a-979f-3188051f228e:47245spunky munkyKato I watch everything I know all. The French German and Russian governments where involved with the oil for food scandal and making billions off the backs of Iraqi's they did agree that there were wmd's but didn't want to give up their illegal cash cow. Look it up the truth is out there you just don't want to believe it. If those countries you named are so noble please take some liberals and go there. http://firstread.msnbc.msn.com/archive/2007/01/31/45915.aspx#48039Thu, 01 Feb 2007 22:49:21 GMT8a5d2dbc-a0e4-4c7a-979f-3188051f228e:48039Kato in Des Moines, IowaSpunky, I never said France, Germany or Russia were "so noble". I loathed the French for sabotaging our efforts to get the UN to take action against Saddam. I also was mad as hell that George Bush and company lacked the leadership and diplomatic skills necessary to get the UN to take action against Saddam. You, on the other hand, made a sweeping statement that is just untrue. The whole world was not in agreement that Iraq had wmd. Hence the inablity of the UN to act as one. Sorry pal, you can make all the generalizations you want and do all the name calling you want, but you can't rewrite history.http://firstread.msnbc.msn.com/archive/2007/01/31/45915.aspx#48348Fri, 02 Feb 2007 14:11:20 GMT8a5d2dbc-a0e4-4c7a-979f-3188051f228e:48348spunky the munkyKato---Why don't you worry about the United States of America and how things affect us (your own country) because the U.N. sure doesn't The U.N. was the front for "The oil for food scandal" That's why they didn't want to help us. It had absolutly nothing to do with our ability to be diplomatic. Look it up Kato I'm afraid it is part of history that has already been written. Go read about if you don't believe me. http://www.pbs.org/newshour/bb/middle_east/july-dec04/oil-for-food_12-3.html----problem is everyone is blinded by their hatred for Bush and that ends up blinding their ability to reason. It keeps the facts hidden when you're in that kind of mind frame. Plus we as taxpayers help support this corrupt organization. Don't get me started on how inept they are at the UN. The concept is excellent and noble I support that about the UN but the people running it are trash. It's because of that trash that they are so contradictory and ineffective. http://firstread.msnbc.msn.com/archive/2007/01/31/45915.aspx#48448Fri, 02 Feb 2007 16:24:36 GMT8a5d2dbc-a0e4-4c7a-979f-3188051f228e:48448KatoSpunky, I do worry about the US. I also worry about the ineffectiveness of the UN. That doesn't excuse the fact that your statement was inaccurate. France and Germany were not the only countries that refused to support our efforts at the UN. There were others who were not involved in the oil-for-food scandal that wanted to continue the UN's policy of containment against Iraq. At the time, I had no problem with the US leading an effort to remove Saddam from power. My primary rationale in supporting the US policy was not so much the allegations of wmd or the human rights factor; my primary rationale was to ensure enforcment of the numerous UN resolutions that Saddam repeatedly ignored or violated. I was only in support of intervention, however, if it was done under the authority of the UN. This is where Bush failed. Bush is an ineffective world leader -- actually he is a terrible world leader. I served as a commissioned officer in the active US Army for 9 years (another 3 years in the Army Reserve). I was always taught from day one in the military that leadership was the art of influencing others. Bush couldn't influence the court of world opinion. He reluctantly went before the UN where he failed miserably. He could only get a handful of the members of the UN security counsel to go along with US policy. The court of world opinion was decidedly against him. Hundreds of thousands marched in the capitals of Europe shunning the US, its President and its foreign policy. I would say in my lifetime (I'm 48 by the way) it was probably the lowest I've ever felt as a US citizen. Bush squandered 55 years of international good will the US built up since World War II. This is why I challenged your sweeping generalization that the whole world was in agreement that Saddam had wmd before we went to war. It's simply not true. That doesn't make me a liberal (as if that were some dirty word). It doesn't make me unpatriotic. It doesn't make me apathetic or Euro-centric (I still despise the French government for the active role it took to undermine the US efforts). I still believe that if Bush could have influenced the UN to support the US position (like his father did before the First Gulf War), the outcome in Iraq would have been totally different. Unfortunately, Bush couldn't deliver for the American people. http://firstread.msnbc.msn.com/archive/2007/01/31/45915.aspx#48908Sat, 03 Feb 2007 04:45:30 GMT8a5d2dbc-a0e4-4c7a-979f-3188051f228e:48908Jane, Southern MississippiI believe all countries in the world should do just what we say. They should trade with who we say they should. They should invade whoever we say they should. They should shun whoever we say they should. We should be the "boss of everybody" as preschoolers say. After all, it would be awful to just mind our business, wouldn't it? If we keep going off half-cocked invading other countries for no legitimate reason, even our allies will think long and hard before they back us. To think we should leave our borders wide open and even put our border patrol agents in jail (Campeon and Ramos) for doing their jobs, and then to say we don't want the terrorists to come here, so we fight them over there is idiotic. We're letting Hezbollah and Al-Quaeda in every day through Mexico. And Venenzuela is Iran's best friend and affords their friends "papers" and a place in our own hemisphere for their training bases from which to attack us. This seems to be OUR BUSINESS, not Iraq. And it would be nice if we could get bin Laden, the head of the 9/11 plot, in Afghanistan, wouldn't it? That would be OUR BUSINESS, not Iraq. Why we are in Iraq is a question for the ages.