Matt:
"Now this statement is factually incorrect. As bad as the human rights records of this Muslim nations may be, Iraq is far worse than all of them, and a far greater supporter of anti-American terrorism. "

I am sorry to say this, but this is PATENTLY FALSE! Libya trained and sheltered the PanAm bombers (remember Lockerbie?), there were ACTIVE terrorist training camps in Libya, Syria and even parts of Jordan all through the 70'a, 80's and 90's. With all due respect, there are STACKS of data on their terrorist connections, and only one flimsy report that one al-Qaida hack is hanging out in Iraq.

Matt, just go to google and enter these terms: Libya Terrorist Training Camps. Do the same for Syria, Egypt etc. You will find more sources than you google can display. Cross reverence on whatever sources for political data you like.

Do you remember the 1985 Rome El Al atatcks? Libya. The 1986 Berlin disco? Libya. The devastating Barracks bombing? Libya! Libya has weapons of mass destruction according to FAS sources. Why not Libya?

Islamic Jihad, Hamas etc- all of these have roots in many nations in the mideast- All of them are fanatically against the USA... Al Qaida just happened to be well organized, dedicated and baldly insane enough to pull of Sept11.

As to you claims that these groups are active in these states but are not supported by them- that is the BS propaganda they try to sell the West! In many cases these terrorist organizations are integrated into the intelligence/domestic security apparati of the states in question (Iran, Libya)

I strongly suggest you chect the past 30 years of history here. Al Qauida is just the fancy new rich kid on the block.

Matt:
"nations don't have good will and they don't have friends - they have interests and they act accordingly."

Yes, this is the most common saying about foreign affairs. I am aware of this.

BUT nationstates do have popular sentiment, against which even tyrannical govenments will not stand too hard or long- Take Turkey for example. The ruling party, by large, and the very powerful military there wanted to take the deal the US was offering, but becuase of massive popular opposition they voted it down in parliment. Turkey still has its big toe dandgling in the waters of military dictatorship, and even they could not override their populace.

Your argument is that it is mainly intimidation that brings other nations in-line WRT aiding us in foreign terrorism? This is false, As you rightly point out, nation-states have interests and act exclusively off of those interests. Interests include:
1) Continuation of power through keeping their people content/in line. They can't support us if their people think we are Nazis
2) Incentives- whats in it for them? What money or what benefit will ther derive (shedding the terrorist flees? making a big deal for domestic economy?)
3) Threats, what is the consequence?

Focus on any of these too much and it will backfire. Nation states will only respond so-far and only so-genuinely in response to just threats. We need to make it within their interest and within the bounds of popular supprt to assist us. Threats will get us only so far.

This war is not supported, is not seen as just. If we execute it, even Pakistan will turn their backs on us- and they need us to help them counter India. PAK could not last more than a week in a war with India, and they know it.

Davin L.