<p>I think few people will disagree that it is a good thing that Saddam Hussein no longer runs Iraq. What people do disagree about is whether it really was in *our* best interest for us to invade Iraq.</p>
<p>If we really wanted to go after State-Sponsored-Terrorism there are a couple other countries we would have done better to attack: Iran and Syria.</p>
<p>I wish Kerry would provide more specifics about his "plans". While there are those radicals who will never be appeased, those recruited to fight against us and Israel are largely poor young men and women (desperately poor) to which life offers nothing. The one thing I've heard Kerry say is that he wants to address this issue. It is a classic case of the "have nots" hating the "haves".</p>
<p>For myself it isn't President Bush himself that concerns so much as the people that run his administration: Cheney, Rove, Rumsfeld and Ashcroft – to name a few popular targets. What they have done in the name of The War On Terror frightens me.</p>
<p>The ends do not justify the means.</p>
<p>"Those who would give up liberty for security deserve neither" to paraphrase Ben Franklin (don't know if I have the quote exactly right).