A world war between Muslims and Catholics -- what an awesome idea. Why didn't I think of that? The brilliance of these Bush-Cheney apologists who want to build a bridge to the 14th century is truly breathtaking. Now excuse me while I go take a shower.

The Top Ten Reasons Why "We" Can't Win:

10. To win a war on terror, the U.S. must first fight a war on terror. Since the 9/11 attacks, the neo-fascist neocons in the so-called republican party have picked fights with a lot of people -- the Taliban, Saddam Hussein, "Old" Europe, the Democrats in Washington, the "Liberal" Media, Hollywood, Hezbollah, Syria, Iran -- but Osama truly bin-forgotten.

9. For the same reasons "we" can't win the war on drugs. Because a phony p.r. campaign designed solely to elect republicans by using lies and disinformation to control the media and scare the crap out of ill-informed voters is, by definition, doomed to fail. (As a means of electing republicans and maintaining one-party rule, it's been a huge success.)

8. Because wars are best avoided unless absolutely necessary, and (if necessary) are won by uniting ones allies and dividing ones enemies in a just cause. Which as near as I can tell is the exact opposite of the Christofascist neo-con strategery of declaring war on dar-al-Islam and then proceeding to alienate the remainder of the planet in the pursuit of dubious objectives (read: crusade for oil) that have nothing to do with 9/11.

7. Because few Americans speak Arabic (or Farsi, Hindi-Urdu, or pretty much any other foreign language). It's difficult to win hearts and minds if one is unable to communicate and totally ignorant about the part of the world at issue (see: Vietnam, U.S. war in). Hint: one's zealous opposition to abortion and gay marriage probably isn't the most pertinent qualification for work in the Green Zone (see: Karen Hughes, propaganda).

OK, I don't read letters longer than two or three paragraphs, and don't expect anyone else to do so, either, so I'll stop. If you've hung in there this far, you get the point.

Adorable Colleen Haskell was the sole reason I've yet found to watch 'Survivor'; but if this stunt is the only way to get African, Asian, and Hispanic people on TV -- and apparently it is -- then we ought to give it a fair chance. If making television in America actually LOOK LIKE America is still considered an "experiment" in the year 2006, then I say it's high time for a whole lot more such stunts.

Robert the Bruce, my point is that a person who sees (certain parts of) the world in the employ of someone else -- the U.S. Army, Exxon-Mobil, the Mormon Church, etc. -- is bound to come away with a different (and, I dare say, more Imperial) perspective than someone traveling on their own dime. I would think this is especially true regarding the developing world, where "Proud Well-Traveled American's" work has left him with the sour view that the entire planet (excepting only Switzerland, Australia, and New Zealand) is "worse" than the U.S. I disagree, and none of this contradicts my point that conservatives share the characteristic of being so profoundly ignorant of the world (see: Afghanistan, Iraq, etc.) because they've never really seen any of it, except perhaps while on spring break or on shore leave -- or from the Imperial vantage of corporate/NGO employment.

The bottom line is that right wing conservatives, almost by definition, have never had their horizons broadened through the enlightening experiences of foreign travel. If you have a better explanation for the Bush-Cheney foreign policy fiasco, then please tell us (but first check out Sidney Blumenthal's piece in Salon today on the new book "Imperial Life in the Emerald City" -- my god the ignorance of so-called republicans is truly sickening).

These failures: a resurgent Taliban, recovering territory formerly controlled by the central government; opium production up significantly; warlord control and the cruel oppression of women beyond downtown Kabul; mob violence against U.S. forces; and by all accounts a despairing populace that is much less optimistic than five years ago. Not to mention the failure to catch Osama bin-forgotten and destroy al-Qaeda -- which continues to attack the West, and was (I seem to remember) the original reason for invading that country.

Shall we talk about Iraq next? Or would you like to make more blanket denunciations of entire continents that are filled with vibrant cities and dignified human beings?

Thanks for admitting your travels have not been as a private citizen, although that was already obvious from your mention of Sudan. I remember reading awhile back that NGO's are now disliked by the people of Kabul, for living well on western salaries while doing virtually nothing to help. Any perspective on that phenonemon you'd care to add?

Despite being so well-traveled, the only places you've seen that are "not worse" than the U.S. are Switzerland, Australia and New Zealand? Everyplace else in the world is worse, really? Uhh, who's the snob?

Thank you, though, for proving my point about conservatives, and how your (ahem) ill-informed view of the rest of the world has led to the Bush-Cheney foreign policy fiasco.