Castiza,

We readily admit we made a mistake with Saddam Hussein, when we supported him. It wasn't a great moment in American history. Still, you are looking past the human rights violations, and the threat to peace in that region, when you say that this war is a crime. You're also saying that this war would have been "legal" if France, Germany, and Russia had signed on board, in the UN.

Am I missing something here? Are you saying that those three "great humanitarian nations" are correct?

Still, in your own words, you've essentially admitted that Hussein should be brought down, when you indicated he should face a world court for his crimes.

So what's your idea on how we get rid of him? Throw grapes at him? Obviously sanctions don't work because he has his buddies in France, Germany, and Russia playing footsie with him, and he's business as usual.

el viajero,

I agree that it's just a small percentage of the protestors who perform acts of violence. The majority of them protestors are non-violent.

I'm fairly well convinced the vast majority of people in Spain are against this war as well, but I am at a loss as to figure out why. I keep hearing statements about leaving Hussein alone, but I never hear anything that tells us how we can get rid of this cancer on the face of the earth. I also agree with your analysis of why certain groups of people will automatically be against it. Strangely enough, not that long ago, I would have probably been one of them. What changed my POV was the facts that I kept digging up. They told me I was wrong.

Over the years, one of the biggest lessons I learned was that you "never offer criticism, you must offer constructive criticism." I guess that's what puzzles me. How do people propose taking care of this man without taking him down?

What I respect most is your ability to deal with facts. Even if we disagree on an issue, it becomes a point of debate, not a mud slinging contest. It's always good to hear valid points of view, even if they oppose our own.

Wolf