[DVaut1]

[ QUOTE ]
Mike,
You seem to be willing to spend copious amounts of verbage on this discussion. To offer my two bits, after having discussed this extensively with a large number of people whom I feel are more politically astute than your average college professor, I firmly believe that the course of history would have been exactly the same if Al Gore won.

Consider it. As far as Iraq is concerned, the continued situation with the UN was not acceptable, the intelligence coming out about WMD's would have been the same no matter who was in office & as we all know, John Kerry voted for the war before he voted against it, as did many other wafflers on the left, and combine that all with the gutted intelligence operative capacity of the CIA, and there was simply no other alternative for a Iraq policy than going to war.

At least we have a President who is willing to do what is necessary, in his view to finish the job of firmly planting Democracy in Iraq, regardless of what the poll numbers say. Other Presidential contenders may not have done the same.

(Que Yoko Ono leading "give peace a chance")

FWIW,
X

[/ QUOTE ]

By claiming that any Democratic president would have done the same -- does that not imply that things are going badly? I can't quite figure out why right-wingers try to claim it; it seems to be saying something along the lines of:

"This war is all [censored] up, but Dems would have done the same".

I think it could, in some way, be trying to demonstrate that we had no other alternatives other than war; but merely claiming that Democrats would have done the same doesn't prove there were no other alternatives.

Am I wrong? I don't quite understand.