You need every possible resource provisioned to protect each and every non-combatant. There remains a likelihood that innocents will die, but that’s what happens when evil menaces the weak.

This is where Israel failed a couple months ago. They say their intent was provisioned, but the result shows that their resources to protect each and every non-combatant were not -- so a Palestinian leader and his family were killed. That Israel didn't mean for the family to die is a crock. They knew the family was very likely present with him. They knew the capabilities of the ordinance in use. They were negligent, for they knew the family would die and did nothing to protect them. Nothing at all. It was wrong -- and they know that as well.

We make the same ends and means decision when we support our police department. The police use force to apprehend criminals. To protect the weak and preserve order - we set up police departments in all our cities.

And if the police fire in a hostage crisis (i.e., Hussein’s attitude toward his own people) without a clear target of the assailant, the result can escalate to something catastrophic. And if that federal sniper should accidentally shoots a civilian, that officer faces charges, a hearing, and usually a trial for the endangerment of those he had sworn to protect.

If we do not get a clear shot at Hussein, then we have to wait until we do. It costs money to wait, but, unless we're planning to put an actual price tag on an innocent's life, that's what we need to do. Now we can be a little sloppier than cops, simply because most of the officials who surround him on a daily basis are likely viable targets, but caution must hold the high ground.

Personally, for Hussein, I wouldn’t be at all troubled if that window of opportunity opened 6 years after he was ousted. The tyrant’s sudden death would be no great loss to humanity, and would shorten the entry for him in my encyclopedia, possibly allowing more room for info pertaining to martyr John Huss (1369-1415).

As I stated earlier to Tom, tight intel and precision bombing is what's required. Our surveillance systems have greatly improved over the past decade -- and they've been combat-tested this year.

Should prove interesting, nonetheless (but then I’m just an old war-monger),
Dan