This morning, I received an email from a co-worker of long ago. Not just a any old co-worker, but my first UNIX mentor. We have managed to stay loosely in touch over the years and I have always thought him to be one who is impeccably cogent but one who does not suffer fools --just do a google groups search on his name to see what I mean by this. I've rambled enough, here's the email:

,----
| I'm not a peace monger, by which I mean I can imagine conditions in
| which I would fight or let my child fight. But I'm also quite
| against getting into fights:
|
| which we can't get out of;
|
| which are unlikely to have a clear outcome;
|
| which don't have the full support of the people;
|
| which don't seem likely to achieve their stated goals;
|
| which have a far greater potential cost than potential
| reward.
|
| I thought that there was a general consensus about all this after
| Vietnam.
|
| What Bush and crew are attempting in the Middle East seems an
| example of the kind of hubris that is likely to cause great and
| lasting damage to this country. In their argument for war, they
| pile fact upon fact in the manner of conspiracy theorists, and
| similarly leap to a conclusion that isn't supported by those facts.
|
| The president is being goaded by advisers into an adventure just as
| Lyndon Johnson was -- the parallels seem quite clear.
|
| I am sure that I am not the only one making these observations, and
| that there are many Republicans and Democrats, conservatives and
| liberals, war veterans and lifelong civilians, who are thinking
| along similar lines.
|
| If you believe that this might be a colossal mistake, please say so
| in a voice we can all hear.
|
|
| - Michael Sierchio
`----