I can understand your position. I lean more towards the way it was explained. A preemptive doctrine against the inevitable nexus of WMD's, their delivery capabilities and terrorists, facilitated mainly by the little hitlers in Iraq, Iraq and N. Korea.
It hasn't followed the path I expected either, but I find it to be the legal, justified, necessary, noble thing to do.
Noble motives perhaps. However, I do not consider it necessary or justified. Legal? Not as I understand the Constitution. We just disagree. I am an isolationist of the strict 1919 Legion of Death variety. I respect your opinion, but can not agree with it.
OswaldTheOsprey
