You seemed also to feel a strong pull to the knee-jerk cry of "appeasement!". Well, Tom, understanding the nature of a problem isn't appeasement. It's simply smart. And if you and Bush are actually sincere about considering war the last resort, why are you so afraid of the possibility that there might be a solution that doesn't involve all that juicy killing and bombing? Doesn't the possibility of a "cost-effective" solution appeal to your Republican heart?

As I have been for the past year, I'm open for suggestions. Even Kerry isn't coming up with any alternatives for the cauldrons of terrorism in the Middle East other than doing exactly what Bush is doing, only "better."

Did you have a solution other than "killing and bombing" for Afghanistan, too?

The solution that actually creates prosperity for the cannon fodder in thugocracies is called "getting rid of the thugs sucking up all the wealth and doing some 'nation building,'" and everybody is screaming about Bush doing exactly this. The standard of living in Iraq is skyrocketing, but that isn't solving the core problems of Syria and Iran pumping insurgents and support for the insurgents into this equation. Iraq is one brick out of the wall, but there are others.

An exercise for the student: take the amount of aid sent to the Palestinians over the past 20 years from the U.S., Europe, and other Middle Eastern nations, and divide it by the number of Palestinians living in "occupied" territory.

Frankly, the sooner somebody knocks off Arafat, the sooner they have a chance at a real solution.