I've heard the idea of co-opting the heroin crop before, and it has good possibilities in my opinion. No worse than buying up U.S. farm crops to keep the prices up and storing them somewhere to rot, which has happened here.

At least you had something useful to offer other than "Bush sucks," which pretty much seems to be the entire thought process for some people.

I explore the alternatives in history because I am irritated by a pervasive liberal myth on this board and others, which boiled down to its simplest form, is "If OUR guys had been in charge all this time, things would be wonderful right now."

This is stood up as an axiom, with no further discussion necessary. No discussion of the history and methods of liberal foreign policy or anti-terrorism activity. No discussion of the past actions of the people who would have been in charge if elections had gone differently. And most of all, no discussion of the actual results of years of liberal foreign policy and anti-terrorism.

9/11 was planned during Clinton's administration, by someone who wrote a long rant on America's pathetic response to terrorism in the past, including retreats in the face of violence by both Democratic and Republican presidents. If it makes you feel better, if Dole had won the 1996 election, 9/11 would have still happened. This is not just about politics. It's about how the United States and its allies are going to face a real issue that's been coming on for almost thirty years now.

We are facing a bigger problem than George W. Bush, but far too many people can't see this.