A more accurate term to describe the neo-conservative war doctrine would be preventive war. Pre-emptive almost connotates a sense of urgency, such as the enemy war bombers flying toward our airspace so we need to shoot them down. But preventive connotates that a rational for war is based on a loose and far potential threat to security.

To use the excuses of imminent threat when it came to Saddam's Iraq almost reminds me of the sad excuses for the German invasion of Poland. The Germans thought Poland was a direct threat to Germany, in fact they were told the Polish had attacked them. You're going to have to face the fact that Iraq was essentially a defenseless state. It couldn't defend itself let alone the stupid idea of landing at the beaches of the largest military power in the world.

And also, you seem to continue to prescribe to the obvious lies that Saddam was a sponser of terrorism and Al-Qaeda. Hell, even Bush (now that it is after the fact) admits that they had no connection. Saddam in fact, in terms of other Middle Eastern countries, rightfully could have been our biggest ally in destroying terrorist cells (seeing as you prescribe to Reagan's unbridled use of the ideology of the enemy of our enemy is our friend). Saddam destroyed terrorist cells when they entered Iraq. Saddam was a secular dictator, and for that reason, most if not all radical Islamic terrorist groups hated Saddam. Osama Bin Laden in fact wanted to call Jihad on him during the first gulf war. And in a very sad sense of irony, it was when we denied Osama the privilege of fighting against Saddam did he begin to cease being a CIA asset and started hating America.

Bush doesn't support a policy of making helpful domestic programs. In fact, his policy is just the opposite: he cuts funding or even cancels many valuable domestic programs. Your attempt at framing Bush as a liberal is pathetic. The reason why Bush drives up the deficit at unprecedented levels is because he gives record-breaking tax cuts to the rich, all the while increasing dramatically the funding to the military, funding the quagmire war in Iraq, as well as corporate welfare.

You are obviously unfamiliar with our dealings in Latin America. Not only do we continue to harbor and give asylum to one of the worst terrorists known to Latin America (Luis Posada Carriles, who is guilty of downing a Cuban airliner killing 73 innocent people), but we also have a record of dealing out terrorism ourselves (including but not limited to, assassinations, supporting coups of rightist genocidal dictators, supporting terrorist groups like the contras, and Luis Posada Carriles himself, for example, was a CIA operative).

Not to mention that our war in Iraq has become the most significant contributor in the exacerbation of terrorism around the world. The biggest recruiter for Al-Qaeda isn't Osama bin Laden but George W. Bush.

"Liberals have a preternatural gift for striking a position on the side of treason...Whenever the nation is under attack, from within or without, liberals side with the enemy."
-Adolf Hitler