I'll hunt them down again this evening.....

Hey Homerun,
Any luck?

OK, Guess not. I'll take your post as unsubstantiated text then.

The one's I blame for this:
 

The three stooges!!

Pretty funny picture. I agree with the sentiment. I'm not so sure they can be blamed for the war though.

make love not war !!!! and lots of it . How come American TV is willing to do war 24/7 yet no love making on TV , some teach their kids nudity is wrong yet buy them play guns in the store ?

Im so confused we are the prudist country and the one with the most sex assaults and crime . In europe sex and nudity are open with freedom to express your nudity they have less sexual assaults yearly that we do .

And who cares about the freakin french worst country Ive ever been in and will never return too .

got to be alot said for women that dont shave !

Spared Spool, Iraq can be blamed for the war.
Uffah, great picture.

Actually, I blame the war on that monster Saddam, not Iraq in general.

Saddam and all his loyal soldiers.
The horror stories (I don't have proof, just hearsay) of his brutality, make me wonder what the protesters say now about this war.
Are they 'cool' with his soldiers burning alive a mother and 2yr old daughter in front of the father, who then suffered the same fate, because of their religion? (my source for this info was an interview on WBZ 1030am this morning).

Believe me, I am not a protestor, but I do believe that people have the right to protest, if they feel strongly about something. That's one of the great things about this country. Question, is it the US's moral responsibilty to go after and take out evil facist dictators wherever we find them in the world? I don't know the answer to that question. A part of me says yes, of course, and another part of me says it is none of our business. What's my opinion matter anyway. I'm just a dwebe posting on Fishing board.

What I've come to understand about this war is that NO ONE dipsputes what a horrible "thing" Saddam Heussein and his government were -- on either side of the equation.

Where, I think, the major chasm appears between the "anti-war" and "pro-Iraq liberation" crowd comes down to is, "Is it the United States' responsibility to free the oppressed people of the world?"

I beleive the US has a moral responsibility to assist the less fortunate, oppressed and tortured peoples of the world. Especially when that torture looks like it is going to be eventually turned upon us Americans (WMD). Simply said, that was why the US governemnt acted as it has on the Iraqi matter. If Heussein and his government weren't so anti-American in his approach (words and deeds), he would still be in power today -- sad as that is to say -- and the US government would not have doner anything about him. It was only after we felt threatened that we took action. BTW - that is EXACTLY the kind of decision I want my leaders making. Protecting Americans first and foremost.

So, Heussein was doomed from the very beginning. It was his calculation that his anti-American sentiment would solidify his power in Iraq, and win him favor in his country against the common enemy - the American "evil empire". What he didn't, nor couldn't control, was the extent to which his "evil American brainwashing" would take hold over his people. This in part help feed the finatical Muslim extremism that launched terrorism on a global scale.

Eventually the Iraqi people saw that Saddam's "let's rally against a common American enemy" was nothing more then a smoke screen to allow him to stay in power. They understood clearly that America was not the enemy of the Iraqi people, but that Saddam was their true enemy. They didn;t see American's hanging and killing their family members all these years -- they saw Heussein and the Ba'ath Party doing all these things.

Absolute power ALWAYS corrupts absolutely. That is why the US will NEVER have such problems, because our DEMOCRACY guarantees never having anyone with absolute power. I get a kick out of all the anti-war folks that say the war was all Bush's idea........did they all forget that only Congress can declare war -- and that the Congress APPROVED this war on Iraq last September -- unanimously!!!

This war was -- and is -- the right thing for America to do -- on all fronts -- including morally, ethically, religiously, politically and diplomatically.

Besides the moral questions, the essential rift is based on whether Saddam was an imminent threat to the US and it's citizens. A lot of evidence points against that theory.

http://www.ccmep.org/2002_articles/Iraq/101002_corn.htm

This is a quote from the article:
"The bottom-line: Saddam is not likely in the near future to hit the United States or share his weapons with al Qaeda or other anti-American terrorists, unless the United States assaults Iraq. This is hardly the picture the President is sharing with the American public. "

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/mid...st/2312369.stm

http://www.guardian.co.uk/usa/story/...808970,00.html

This is a quote from the above article:
"President George Bush's attempt to maintain public support for military action against Iraq has taken a fresh blow from an unexpected quarter, with the publication of a letter from the CIA stating that while Saddam Hussein poses little threat to America now, a US invasion could push him into retaliating with chemical or biological weapons."

It is all moot at this point anyway. Saddam is evil, our troops are there, so let's get him out of power as quickly as possible, hopefully by killing him.

That is what I think the entire debate gets down to......."not likely" does not mean that he wouldn't do it, and "near future" does not mean he wouldn't have done it eventually. Frankly, I couldn't forsee him NOT sharing his weapons with other enemies of the US. I beleive he wanted to have others do his dirty work for him, as he knew he would never be able to take on the U.S. himself -- and if he tried to the U.S. would crush him out of power. So, he tried to "brainwash" a bunch of people into thinking America was so evil so that they would do harm to America on his behalf. Saddam is a coward -- big time.

I beleive in preemption. The same way I wouldn't go outside in the winter with little clothes on and risk getting sick.

But I agree with you, it is all -- thankfully -- a moot point as Saddam is done and Iraq will be a better place for it. More importantly, the world is a better place for it -- and again, that is thanks to the United States of America.

BTW - I'll also point out that the sources you quoted have, so far, been inaccurate in their assessment of things. There have been no use of chemical weapons that we know of, and no acts of terrorism against the U.S. as a result of this war. Even the foundamentalist Muslims understand that Saddam was an evil man who would have turned on them as well if he had the chance. The quotes and sources you provided said a lot of things like, "....eventually...." and "....to date has not...." and "....we do not think....". None of them seemed to KNOW much, and mostly were postulating. That is not a risk I am willing to take.

Well, thank god they have been inaccurate. And it is not over yet. Let's hope that Saddam doesn't have any WMD, because he could launch one at anytime. A lot of the information was from a letter written by Goerge Tenet, the Director of the CIA.

Agreed