This war on terror is interesting in the different view points of what this war on terror is all about.
Democrates:
The only terrorists worth fighting have to be DIRECTLY tied to the events of 9-11. Therefore Afganistan was a viable target because they harbored Osama. Essentially all others get a pass.
Republicans:
A terrorist is a terrorist. In the Islamic chain of terrorism ALL sects are in one way or another fair game. Since it is well proven that Saddam H. supported the families of the bombers in Isreal, he was a supporter of terrorism, therefore a terrorist. He has also given medical aid and supplies to terrorists, therefore he is a terrorist and fair game.
I suppose this beggs the question, "Why have we given other terrorists a pass." Well, have we really or are we waiting to clean up the situations we are in right now before extending further.
If it were up to me, I'd show absolutely no tolerance for any type of terrorism, in my book the IRA is just as bad as the Islamic terrorists and should be hunted down with equal enthusiasm. Then there is the Africa. My god, what the hell is going on there. Murder and slaughter is the entertainment of the day. Then there are the issues in Asia and Russia (not the nations but the terrorist problems). I suppose we can't be the police agency of the world, but somebody needs to do something and unless there is profit in it the United Nations is useless. The United Nations is no more valuable to the world than the League of Nations was. I am increasingly of the belief that the United Nations has out lived itself and should go away.