The catch-all phrase "the war on terrorism", in all honesty, has no more meaning than if one wants to wage a war against "criminal gangsterism". Terrorism is a tactic. You can't have a war against a tactic. It's deliberately vague and non-definable in order to justify and permit perpetual war anywhere and under any circumstance.

Why is it is claimed that if people won't or can't take care of their own needs, that people in government can do it for them?

I think it's a theory... the theory of evolution and I don't accept it as a theory.

In time it will become clear to everyone that support for the policies of pre-emptive war and interventionist nation-building will have much greater significance than the removal of Saddam Hussein itself.

History has shown that the masses have been quite receptive to the promises of authoritarians which are rarely if ever fulfilled.

Ideas are the only things that count, and politicians are, for the most part, pretty much irrelevant.

I would say nobody is perfect. I don't know all the answers. I have don't want to run people's lives and run the world and run the economy. So, my qualifications are a little bit different.