I agree with a lot of what you said in your last post(without the links), which is why I still don't understand your position. And, yeah, I advocate going after terrorists in Saudi Arabia, or anywhere. And I never said or seem to think that terrorists are born. If the middle east wasn't comprised of third-world autocracies, then fewer terrorist would be made though.
The whole ideal behind my view is that if there aren't any governments or groups that advocate terror, then the terrorist 'Production" will decrease--or rather, hopefully cease altogether. But nobody is saying it will be easy or short. It will take time, effort and sacrifice. And I am not "swallowing" party "line." I assure you I've had my own doubts about the war on terror...
Also, I am not talking about eliminating all fanatical muslims--just those devoted enough to murder.
And maybe the president is waiting for reelction to go after Saudi terrorists. Just a thought, but because it is obvious (to me at least) that reguardless of what else you think of Bush, Kerry is not fit to lead the nation. If we did go into Arabia and the economy did suffer, then Bush would have almost no chance at reelection. And although I'm sure you'd love that aftereffect, it would be disasterous for the war on terror and for whatever would be left of the economy.*
*If I made a huge mistake here, forgive me. I am definitely thinking under pressure here.