The U.S is losing its cachet as a global superpower.

Iraq costs us time, men, money, etc., yes, but what's your point? Where's a better place to fight than the first pitched battle of the new war? As long as we stay there, the terrorists will flock to Iraq like ants to candy. Their innate nature makes it unacceptable for them to lose a battle against their mortal enemy, and they will pour limitless resources into winning it. Our forces have crushed, but not destroyed al-Qaeda in Iraq, and since we have not, they will fight on. If we pack up and leave, if we lose face, things will never be the same. Vietnam was bad, but this could be far worse, but only if we leave. It's perfectly feasible that the government would fall apart if we left. The Iraqi government has it's flaws, but the very nature of the native religion makes them almost incompatible with democracy. But anything that we leave them with will be better than what they or any other Middle Eastern country has or ever had. I believe it will hold if we stay a while longer to shore it up, but neither you or I can predict the future. Japan had less of a problem setting up their democracy because their country had been sufficiently beaten to the point where a government contrary to the former could be easily set up. And we were there to make damn sure they did. And they did. They have made of the strongest and most prosperous democracies in the world. But it took them longer to set up a government than it did the Iraqis. The Japanese built their government from scratch, with America intervening to make sure their constitution passed and that no civil strife emerged. The Iraqi government was solely set up by Iraqis with firm US direction. Nevertheless, the basis for my statement is clear. If the Palestinians were a threat to Israel, they were a threat to our allies and our interests, hence ourselves. Israel remains the only real democracy in the Middle East, and possibly our most crucial and supportive ally. Iraq doesn't need to target America; there are far greater points of weakness about. The mere thought of a terrorist sponsor acquiring WMDs is a catastrophe in itself. Even if you were right, and no weapons were ever found, Saddam had them before, used them before, and had every intention of using them again. This you can't deny, unless you're indifferently cynical. America has an obligation to uphold human rights in the world, which every Muslim nation disrespects. Now, Iraqi girls have access to schools and jobs. Saddam's brutal secret police no longer purge the streets. Baghdad remains the only trouble spot, mostly due to the large mixing of ethnic and religious groups. But order is even being restored there, utilities are being restored, general life is slowly returning to normal. It's a difficult moral position on your part to say there were better off as expendable animals subject to death at any given moment than now. Enough of Iraq. The EU is in a precarious situation and they don't even know it. Regardless of what 'experts' (translation: they're always wrong) you cite, it's difficult to deny the underlying problems of the EU. No European nation has a healthy birth rate. Now, for a centralized European economy to function correctly, there must be a constantly expanding population for it to even come close to prosper. The enormous entitlement programs lavished upon the European people need a ever expanding workforce to steal tax money from to support the also ever expanding elderly. Europe is currently running out of workers, in short. As the ones who are working have tax upon tax levied upon them, they will opt to leave rather than suffer under these tax money dictators. Europe's economy is running off the prosperity won by their ancestors a few decades ago (and for that matter, America!). But even trains come to a stop. Europe's economy is headed for a downward spiral in the coming years, and it's almost entirely their fault. Europe can opt for big government or population control, but not both. It's a self defeating idea, one the Europeans will dig their grave with. Next comes the Islamic problem. Currently, the only groups expanding their numbers are Muslims in European nations. But that's irrelevant unless some questions are answered. Do the majority work for their respective nation's prosperity? Do they view themselves as French or British or German? Are they sufficiently assimilated? Do they generally like or trust Europeans? Answer to all: no. The 30-50 million Muslims of Europe are mainly immigrants sucking on the teat of the European welfare state. They don't work because they view it as degrading to work for the infidel. They commonly view themselves as Muslims before anything else. So, when you have a large population (and a growing one) that, to put it mildly, whose religion has a somewhat fractious relationship with the principles of a free society and who haven't really done anything useful for science, technology, or economics since it's founding, how do you believe things will turn out in Europe? And the Europeans have become so indifferent to their nationality and the concept of citizenship that they've turned themselves into a bunch of squeamish, whining babies who can't really help themselves. They also have not been shown to be willing to stand up for certain rights even when clearly in the right. They are unwilling to confront the Islamic threat in their nations, to fix their shattered birth rates, to think of a future instead of a pleasurable present. Islam and non-native Europeans will be the majority in Europe within the next 50 years, but I'd reckon sooner rather than later. You are only scratching the surface of the European Union, as are your friends and 'experts'. The EU is going to collapse under it's own dead weight. China does have an astounding grip on our economy, mostly due to our unwillingness to confront China and the WTO with some extremely unfair business practices. China does not allow the yuan to float freely on the market and instead suppress it, making it more expensive for us to import their goods, but cheaper for them to import our goods. China has the largest counterfeiting, drug manufacturing, and pirating operation in the world, and it has made them filthy rich. Our imports are taxed twice going into China, but theirs are not even taxed once. Unfortunately, free trade does not mean fair trade. China has the worst environmental record of any country in the world. And since China holds so much of our debt, it puts us in too precarious a position to call them out on it. We simply buy too much from China. America has sold it's principles to a repressive and cheapskate country for cheap goods, mainly manufactured through near slave labor. But, if they pulled the rug on America, they would suffer just as much as we would. The loss of their single largest consumer would be a crippling blow to the economy that would set back both our nations by 35 years. But I don't believe they would do this, because as much as I abhor China's economic policies, and their government especially, I realize that they are not stupid. But just realize that the trade deficit means that Chinese goods are imported into the US for that much more money than the US imports into China. This is not a measure of any debt that we owe them, so I hardly see how this is so pressing of a problem. China's internal problems will solve all our problems for us, however. Their government won't be able to hold together a restless and starving population while other reap the benefits of capitalism. I'm not particularly concerned about China's rise to power. I know it's fake. Russia is a nullity wrapped in an abyss and is suffering a worse fate than the rest of Europe. It's unlikely that the Russians will be able to muster the money for those aircraft while so much money goes to fighting AIDs, Islamic terrorism, and a collapsed birth rate. And even if they do, they won't be keeping the advantage long. Nice debate!