(from Jordon Cooper)

I was watching some news today and was suprised at some comments by some anti-war protesters that link a war gone bad in Iraq is good for getting rid of George W. Bush. Let's leave ones feeling for W. at the door and think about the statement. A war bogged down generally involves a lot of deaths, both civiliian and military. At one time the peace movement is saying don't go to war for oil (their words, not mine) but on the other hand you would like the war to go badly so Bush's popularity will go down. This isn't a chess match but a war with Iraqui and American lives at stake. I would think you would want it to go quickly. While I am don't believe in the war, the last thing I want it to do is drag out for political reasons.

On a different topic with the war. People are blaming the Americans for underestimating the power of the secret police in Iraq. If I was an Iraqi citizen, I wouldn't be dancing in the streets either. Not because I was anti Brit or American, because who wants to be killed by some pro-Saddam martyrs. Even the Saudi papers are saying people are saying different things on and off camera. On camera they are "anti-American", off camera, they are "anti-Saddam". Historically I think of the denazification of Germany and it took years to root out. I have to think that the de-baathification of Iraq would also take years to identify and neutralize (I don't mean kill, I mean not let them kill or intimidate others) the secret police. At the same time, I wonder if the Arab world would allow the kind of time and methods that would be needed to eliminate the radical parts left over. I have this fear of a Northern Ireland type of aftermath, no matter who is running the place and I have to think that is the worst case scenerio.