As disagreeable as it might be, at one time a Republican administration made the point that you cannot do a wrong thing, even if it is for a "right" reason.

In other words, the ends do not justify the means used.

In our present administration, bogus ends were used to justify an invasion that does not serve any national purpose. The outrageous idea that we went to war because Saddam was a very bad man, and his sons were even worse is so stupid that anyone agreeing with it offers a carte blanche for our government to attack half the nations on this planet. And the corolary to this excuse offers an excuse for any group that might consider Bush a "bad man" to attack us.

Should we have risked war with the Soviets in 1956 over the Hungary situation? From a strickly moral standpoint--yes. From the standpoint of such an action being in the national interest--obviously Eisenhower thought not.

And in the long run, Eisenhower made the correct decision. The Soviets self-destructed because they over-extended themselves financially because of their imperialistic impulses. They allowed their taxation system to get out of hand and the underground economy became greater than the legitimate one. Soviet trade imbalances became so egregious they are still digging themselves out from under.

Any comparisons between the Soviet experience and ours is strictly interpretive--and probably accurate.

Publius