Being a guy who is always eager to steer good folks back on course when they have lost their way, allow me to give you some direction and respond to the mind-numbing vitriol that you have put forth, although I scarcely know where to start.

First, let's talk about the Bush history with Iraq and the Butcher of Baghdad. HW Bush intervened when Iraq invaded Kuwait because the latter is our ally. Any ally of America that is ruthlessly attacked by a crazed, bloodthirsty dictator can rest assured that the United States will come to its rescue. The current Bush administration, by going to war against Iraq in the near future, will be saving a lot more than one small country and its oil. We know that Saddam Hussein has weapons of mass destruction, including biological and chemical weapons. Further, we know he is frantically working to either build or obtain a nuclear bomb if he doesn't have one or more already. There is evidence from reputable sources, including Yossef Bodansky (one of the premier experts on the subject), that Hussein has given aid to Osama bin Laden by lending the talents of Iraqi scientists in order to build nuclear devices for his terror network. If Hussein can afford to help other terrorists obtain nukes, that strongly suggests to me, at least, that he may already have them, himself. There is also much evidence that there has already been a proliferation of nuclear weapons among terrorist networks and "Axis of Evil" nations. We know that Russia is missing roughly 200 nukes, many in the form of suitcase bombs, which are, obviously, very easy to smuggle into desirable target areas. Many people in the know believe that the Russian mafia has sold nukes to the likes of bin Laden and possibly Hussein. With this in mind, the question is, will Saddam use nukes against us if he does, in fact, have them in his possession?

Saddam has a long and horrible history which leads most reasonable, common-sense people to believe that he would probably not hesitate to hit America proper or Americans abroad (or Israel) with the most devastating blow he could possibly muster -- that of a nuclear bomb or two. Anyone who doubts that he is a genuinely evil man has either not given the matter much thought or been brainwashed by the peaceniks. Let me present you with the facts. In the thirty years that Saddam Hussein has been in power, he has gassed civilians in his own country and committed countless other crimes against humanity, murdered and tortured his critics (a recently leaked video out of Baghdad shows Saddam at a meeting with political adversaries in which he shoots one through the head, himself), endorsed the wonton raping and torture of innocent civilians (Bush mentioned this in his speech to the UN, stating that Saddam's goons rape mothers in front of their children and husbands), sent oodles of cash to the families of Palestinian homicide bombers, horded billions of oil dollars (which are in French banks) while neglecting his starving people, financed terrorist organizations and operations, deceived and defied the wishes of the United Nations Security Council, which he agreed to abide by, and generally made himself the number one obstacle to stability and peace in the Middle East and the rest of the world. He is the Hitler of the 21st Century, plain and simple. I don't know about you, but I am NOT willing to risk the lives of millions of Americans by delaying the attack on Iraq and subsequent elimination of Saddam Hussein. If we do not act preemptively, rest assured that liberals will eventually get their incontrovertible proof that Saddam does indeed have weapons of mass destruction. This will be in the form of countless dead Americans. My girlfriend told me the other day that the prospect of war against Iraq scared her. Well, the prospect of waiting and hoping that Saddam doesn't level a major metropolitan area scares me a lot more.

As far as the Bush administration being the "dumbest administration" and Bush being the "stupidest president," this is all simply nonsense. While I do not personally believe Bush has an intellect on par with some of our brightest political thinkers, he is certainly a smart, well-educated man. Worthless past presidents have proven that it takes more than brains to effectively lead this country. In this regard, Clinton and Carter immediately spring to mind, and the characteristics they lacked, such as resolve, courage, and, at least in Clinton's case, morality, honesty, and decency, GW Bush has in spades. Bush has certainly made more intelligent choices for his administration than Clinton or Carter, and as a result, he is surrounded by some of the best and brightest in the business. Cheney, Rice, Rumsfield, and Powell. This is a peerless lineup if I've ever seen one. Enough said.

Anti-capitalism people are anti-American, as far as I'm concerned. Capitalism is a cornerstone of America equal to liberty and democracy. The day Microsoft goes out of business is the day that we go into a depression that will make the Great Depression seem bullish in comparison.

Once you get into the Nostradamus crap, I don't even know what to say. Did he make several eerie predictions that have supposedly come true according to some folk's interpretations? I guess so, but it's lunacy to decide policy according to his bizarre writings.

There will be no draft. And if there ever is a draft, you'll have to live with your cowardice for the rest of your life. Then again, it didn't stop Bill Clinton from getting to the top.

Your assertion that America has no right to judge who is good or evil because we are as corrupt as any other country proves that you are not the patriot that you say you are. A good American knows that America is the most benevolent and generous super power in the history of civilization. No other nation has done more for the downtrodden of the world. Those in need look to us for help the world over, and we are always the first to offer it. America is the world's beacon of freedom and hope. Is America perfect? Of course not, but it's the greatest country the world has ever seen.

We did not "stuff our beliefs" down the throats of the people of Afghanistan. Rather, we liberated them from the oppression of an evil terrorist regime. Damn us! What kind of evil bastards are we? Any civil rights advocate who is against the war in Afghanistan is a hypocrite. The women of Afghanistan were treated no better than dogs under the Taliban; they were not allowed to work, get an education, show their faces, or even laugh out loud (which would get them mercilessly beaten). Anyone who is interested in civil rights should be rejoicing that America took down the Taliban.

The war in Iraq will continue where HW Bush mistakenly left off, and I'm betting it will be quick and easy. Saddam's military is nowhere near the strength that it enjoyed before the Gulf War, and just as they did then, Iraqi soldiers will surrender en masse. They do not want to die for Saddam Hussein; they hate the man. I think Saddam could be dead in as little as a week (a month at the most) with minimal civilian casualties. With the demise of the tyrannical Butcher of Baghdad, peace in the Middle East will be that much closer. Next stop Iran.