Replies

The 8 European nations that signed up with Blair and that support the US approach have displayed *far more* reason than the leftist Govt in Germany and than the French.

There is nothing 'reasoned' about appeasement to dictators, complacency in the face of growing threats, and cowardly failure to show resolution in the face of defiance.

Moreover, the 'cost' of military deployment through sanctions dwarfs the cost of deployment in the last months - yet our current buildup has done more than 12 years of sanctions to actually move Saddam in the right direction.

What is truly embarrassing is trying to save the a** of a dictator - Saddam - who killed millions, including hundreds of thousands of Iraqi Kurds, who tortures and kills dissidents and would-be threats to hiw power, and who is the world's #1 Warmonger.

I was in Munich 2 days back. The "anti-war" protesters inlcuded a contingent of Communists waving hammer and sickle and "Che Gueverra" flags. That is how debased the so-called 'antiwar' movement is - it brings in Communists to defend an Islamic dictator who reveres Hitler and Stalin.

Anyone who still thinks Iraq doesnt have WMD after powell's speech is deaf, dumb, and blind.

Anyone who still thinks Iraq doesnt have WMD after powell's speech is deaf, dumb, and blind.

And anyone who thinks Iraq has any nuclear weapons after all of Bush's lies and exaggerations have been exposed is engaged in mindless wishful thinking. Even if Bush's claim about Iraq trying to purchase aluminum alloy tubes is true, hundreds of other materials would have had to be purchased and assembled before Iraq could make a nuclear reactor to begin the process of making a nuclear weapon. Because Bush never even alleged that Iraq is also assembling those hundreds of other materials, I'm inclined to accept Iraq's explanation that the aluminum alloy tubes were intended for making conventional missiles. Bush never said he had any evidence that Iraq's claim is false.

Regarding Powell's speech, why accept the word of a shill for Bush whose "evidence" was based upon the 12 year old writings of a U.S. grad student?