"The evil that men do lives after them; The good is oft interred with their bones..."

So let it be with Reagan.

Watching all those enconmiums being heaped on Reagan set me thinking - has society morphed so much since Shakespeare that we now will speak only of the good things a man did?? or is it our way of being decent to a man who had lost all his faculties and was a vertiable vegetable in his last few years of existence.

Reagan for all his achievements (Winner of the COLD WAR...!) is also squarely responsible for the largescale alienation of the islamic world that is a trademark of American policy today - he set in motion the events that led to the talibanization of Afghanistan - at that time with the "noble" motive of driving the communists away - but who that has raised a lion has not been consumed by it, who that has fanned a fire has not been burned.....the millions that America pumped into Afghanistan then is now coming back to strike it.........Bin Laden was a decorated hero, who was praised in all of America as the one that liberated Afghanistan from the commies - see what he is now?!!

Drives me to another point - what should a leader do when faced with choice -should he take the decision that is best for himself, for his country or for the entire world - what is his sphere of influence, and what should he be concerned about - George Bush might genuinely believe that he has rid the world of a fanatic (read Saddam) and that it is in Humankinds interest to bring democracy to the Mid-east......but is that something beyind his control - is he biting more than he can chew? and who is HE to decide what is in everyone's interest - if he can, why do only the Americans vote for him - what gives the discretion to go after say a Saddam on what he claims are WMDs....while choosing to blatantly ignore North Korea or to a lesser extent Pakistan......

hey enuf of heavy stuff....think i'll over and out now - catch you guys later....

oks..