SDAI-Tech1 and I are on the same wavelength concerning Iraq's strategic importance. A point that often comes up concerning Iraq is the issue of disengagement or an end-game strategy. Of course, Bush and others have said that we won't leave Iraq until the situation there has stabilized (democracy has been established). This maybe a coded phrase indicating that "we'll never leave" since the culture there may not allow for the possibility of democracy. I'm uncomfortable with the prospect that we're going to have troops there for the next 50 years with US soldiers being killed on average about once or twice a month. However I'm even more uncomfortable with the prospect of a 747 being flown into the Sears Tower or the Golden Gate Bridge getting blown up. This is a clash between between two fundamentally antagonistic cultures. Until we can learn to get along, it's best to wage the war on their turf.

Concerning rogue states and nukes: Years ago I took a graduate course on nuclear reactor design. The best student in my class was an Iranian. That particular Iranian (who's a nice guy) probably still lives in the US. However this demonstrates that Iranians are quite capable of handling nuclear technology. If the Iranians develope nuclear weapons technology, we are in serious trouble. That plutonium reprocessing facility in Iran needs to be flattened ASAP. The Israelis showed considerable foresight when they destroyed the Osiraq reactor before it went critical. We need to show similar wisdom towards the Iranians and North Koreans.

Gary