I indeed have changed my mind with regard to going to war with Iraq.  In my view, the only politics being played out is that within the UN.  Bush and his administration have dealt straight forward from the start. 

Well, I'm sorry to hear you changed your mind Kevin. I'll admit that the United Nations has put itself on shakey ground with it's bend, bend, bend, bend policy. If that's the way they're going to operate it's pretty certain they will not be taken seriously. To say that Bush and the current admistration have played it straight is off the wall though. We're at condition Orange right now and what has our government told us to make us feel better? Go buy sheets of plastic and duct tape to seal up your homes. Umm, that's nice. What does that tell you? It tells me they don't think there's much they can do to stop an attack but hey, we'll bomb Iraq anyway. Might as well get a little bang for our buck.  

I'll reiterate what Pat said...Bin Laden did not have ships or planes to reach our shores and yet he did.  In a horrible way.  I see Saddam as being as big a threat if not more so than Bin Laden.  Just as evil and just as determined. 

What have we been waiting for then? Why didn't we go after this guy a long time ago? Why didn't the first Bush pull the trigger when he had the chance? Why now? What was the hold up? How long ago was it that Saddam was told to get rid of his stockpile? We're talking years right? What made us wait? Why didn't Bush make this part of his campaign rhetoric? We've known about it...maybe his margin of victory would have been much wider had he announced "When I'm elected I'll take out Saddam to protect our great nation from the threat of terror." For a guy that we all seem to think is so dangerous to us I don't recall anyone calling for a war with Iraq prior to 9/11. We certainly seem to be using that as an excuse to go get him now though even though we can't tie him to the act.  Remember Kevin, terror is bin Laden's business...Saddam is just a two bit dictator. Remember how his sorry excuse for an army folded in the Gulf. He wasn't very dangerous then and he's not now...he's a menace to his own people and to himself because he's too stupid to know any better.

If there was a realistic chance that we could negotiate away the current problem I'd be against the war.  I just don't see how you can possibly believe there is meaningful dialog to be had given who we're dealing with.  Who shall we negotiate with?

You are absolutely right about it being a waste of time to negotiate with Saddam. He's an ignorant bastard and he does need to be removed from power but there's no rush to do it. He's handcuffed in the current situation so we can take our time and get agreement from the rest of the world before we resort to attacking them while there is still resistance to the idea. He dumb enough that if we give him the rope he'll hang himself, which he's just about done at this point.

Everyone is talking about giving the inspectors more time to do their job.  Do you know what their job is?  Their job is not to go looking for hidden evidence of WOMD.  Their job is to simply verify that the weapons which Iraq had have been destroyed.  It was never the intention of the inspectors to be doing surprise inspections.  It would be an unrealistic expectation to believe they could turn up the necessary evidence to justify going to war.

We knew this before the inspectors even went there. We knew Saddam had not destroyed all of his stockpile years ago.

I think a reasonable person can conclude that in the very near future if we don't act now, the weapons he's developing will make their way into the hands of terrorist types who will use them on us.  That for me is what I hang my hat on and say 'enough'.

You should be saying that about North Korea. About all Saddam can develop right now would be a case of night sweats. He just wants to keep his money and power at this point. North Korea on the other hand wants to be a player and they have the capability to kill a lot of people in a hurry.

I mean no disrespect to your soldier friend.  I too served my time, 4 years in the Navy from '75 to '79.  It was a volunteer service then as it is now.  Going to war was the furthest thing from my mind when I enlisted but I also knew that it was a possibility.  If your friend was involved with the Gulf war I'd be curious to know why he's still in the military as not much has changed in the last 12 years. 

Thanks for your service and I respect what you're saying here. He's still in the military because he's only got a short time left till he's got his 20 years in. He's made a career of it. He started out a gung ho G.I. Joe but as you might expect it takes it toll.

I saw over the weekend all of the coverage of war protesters around the country.  That can be a bit misleading because it leaves one with the impression that these are the only voices which should matter. 

I don't think it gives that impression. I think it shows that there are a lot of people that don't agree with what may happen. There is still the possibility that Saddam may fold his hand which would be in his best interest because Iraq has no chance against us. 

 What about the Iraqi citizens who can't march in the street to support our liberation of their country.  You'll never hear their voices so long as Saddam remains in power.  Shouldn't those matter too?

Well I'll say this...if they ever were gonna protest in Iraq they should do so now if they want the US to attack. If Saddam started slaughtering protesters right now that would be all the excuse we'd need to let the bombs start falling. It won't be long now before we know what's going to happen.

                                                                  Reg