Questions Not Asked

Republican presidential contenders are being all forced to answer the question "Knowing what we do now, would you have went to war with Iraq?" I believe it should occur to anyone with the proverbial half a brain that only part of the conclusion in judgement comparison of those who favored war vs those who did not could be drawn if the story were left there as liberals are content to do. Such questions might provide insight into the judgement of one side, when provided with divine knowledge at the onset of an action, but to be fair, we need to also ask the other side to answer a comparable question "Why would you not wage war against any State that provides aid, comfort, means, methods and materials to those intending to kill you by the tens of thousands every chance they get?" Hindsight has shown the main materials, weapons of mass-destruction, were possibly not there, but every expert, every where, assured they were before the war was waged. Another obvious question to ask someone running for president might be "how do you know when to ignore all the experts when making a decision?" We apparently expect republicans to know when all the world's experts are wrong, why should we not expect democrats to have the same ability? We have started down this silly road of hypothetical questions and what-ifs and there is no end to such stupidity. It can not be proven that going into Iraq was a mistake but it is easy to see pulling out the way we have has been a disaster and that might be the purpose of this whole exercise, just ask a few hypothetical questions and hope everyone thinks the other guy is more stupid than you are. cjpost