What Happens When America's Military Might Is Focused On The Wrong Thing?

If we were not in Iraq to begin with, might we have been able to martial those resources toward a better end?

Are there any other bloggers out there who are tired of the "stay-the-course" strategy bolstered by the bait and switch argument that "the-world-is-a-much-better-place-without-Saddam" rationale?

Well, I asked the other day for proof the latter statement from the President and as of yet am unrequited. Here's proof of the antithesis:

Unless something changes soon, by the end of President Bush’s second term North Korea will have produced enough plutonium for 10 or more nuclear weapons while Iran’s scientists will be close to mastering the skills needed to build their own.

That’s quite a legacy for a president sworn to keep the world’s most dangerous weapons out of the hands of the world’s most dangerous regimes.

Again, I wait with bated breath for an the proof that we are better off given that we have spent hundreds of billions of dollars on a war we shouldn't have initiated (by which I mean the Iraqi Conflagration, not the "war-on-terror;" which by the way is poorly named as well, but that is best left for another post).