[benebob]

Well written there Larry although I surely hope that war is not inevitable. If it is we just started a new version of the cold war. We will have single handedly weakened the UN to the point that it is useless, alienated many of the "friends" throughout the world that we need to count on. The "friends" that we don't alienate will complain about what they have lost $$$ wise from our endevours resulting in Marshall Plan size aide packages to these countries. Worst of all this war on terrorism will reach a new level. If 75% of Britains are against action without the US what do you think the percentage of Kuwaitee citizians is? Jordan, Sadia Arabia, Pakastan?

I too am very saddened by our double standard to weapons. The U.S. has the largest stockpile of useable bioweapons and is second in the world in chemical weapons (behind Russia). Both the U.S. and Russia signed agreements banning the use and pocession of such weapons. Iraq has never signed such a treaty and is not bound to the agreements that both the US and Russia have not fulfilled. Yes you can make the arguement that Sadam used such weapons against his neighbors and his own people but looking at it closer he used chemical weapons in the Iran-Iraq war (a war that the US encouraged him to undertake). Once that the Iranians began to regain their territory after initial losses. He also used them against a rebeling people during the conflict to suppress his opposition during a time of war. Anybody remember Kent State, the internment of Japanese-American citizens, the blacklists surrounding suspected communists?

In essence Saddam did the same thing that the US has done and continues to do. Analizes his best bang for the buck and what will allow his forces to minimize losses. Isn't that what our plan was when we dropped the atomic bombs on Japan? Isn't that why we developed these smart bombs? I'm sure if he or any other country had such resources they would develop such weapons as to protect themselves as well but without money how do you protect yourself? You must rely on chemical and bioweapons which are very very cheap to produce and use.

No, I never though Saddam was a good man. He was exiled from his own country in the late 60's for attempting to overthrow the very tolerate and progressive government (for the middle east at least- a Christian could vote which is something that Isreal has yet to allow to this day). How did he get back and develop a power base? With the help of the US who wanted more oil in the 70's so that we could continue to drive our 7 mpg boats around.

I have yet to see a benefit to this war. There are no plans for a post Saddam Iraq other than a democratic style government. Keep in mind that there is not a democratic government in the middle east. Israel is not since over 40% of the population cannot vote likewise with Turkey. Do you really think that installing one democracy in the region will create more stability in the middle east or will it just cause the friends we relied on to support the war to ask us to help suppress the revolutions against their dictatorships.

That said, I have many friends who have left or are soon heading to the middle east and they have my full support and thoughts. But where is the need to kill another 100-200,000 Iraqees when all we need is one shot? Its not like we are/have gone along with the treaties we've entered into, the UN governing body, or moral agreements we have made all along so why should we pretend to now?