I could jump on everybody here, regardless of political views, who expresses an inconsistent, irrational, or outright idiotic viewpoint. Didn't realize that was my job, nor do I believe I am such an archtype of perfection that it should be my job. Don't you think I'm ubiquitous enough here as it is?

I pick my arguments, and who I argue with depends on a lot of things. Sometimes it's just my mood. As just one example, sometimes I ding Bowser on lots of things. Sometimes I ignore him for a couple of weeks. I like arguing with those who have reasonable arguments. I don't like arguing with screwballs.

When a screwball posts something, I try to ignore it, unless I have information that clarifies things for everyone else here, or some fact that flattens the premise without too much extra work. I will not go so far as saying I never drop a cheap shot on such people. I'm not perfect.

I don't need to justify my responses. This isn't my blog, and I'm not getting paid for this.

While I notice you jumping enthusiastically down the throat of those bringing up irrational science, and more power to you, although I'd be less acidic about it, I don't see a lot of criticism of the anti-war side from you either.

Now. Is this war a mistake?

The hard fact is that if we did not have troops in Iraq today, we'd have them there five or ten years from now. Or in Iran. Or God forbid, both. The Iraqi regime was not going to fade into obscurity, and it's a fantasy to assume that the status quo was stable, or that the United Nations would be able to do jack shit to restrain Saddam if he decided to flaunt them. Look at Iran building nukes under their noses. Does anyone think that without a threat of American force that anyone would listen to the U.N. at all?

If we had never attacked Iraq, the war in Afghanistan would have brought in every last one of the terrorists currently attacking us in Iraq. Ask yourself where Zarqawi would be right now.

I can't get over the ludicrous concept that the war in Iraq "creates" terrorists, but that ripping al Qaeda out of Afghanistan and toppling the Islamist Taliban would somehow have created no new terrorists at all.

My memory isn't that bad. I recall quite clearly that at the end of 2001, the war in Afghanistan was being condemned just as loudly by the peaceniks. Had Iraq never been invaded, the Democratic presidential campaign would have admitted that the invasion of Afghanistan was a good idea, but that Bush had totally screwed it up and Kerry would have done it so much better. Same old song, different lyrics.