thijs,

Please don't refer to my stand on the issue as "conservative learning." I'm actually more like you than you'd imagine. My leanings are towards a socialized society that offers protection for the young, old, and those who cannot afford necessities like health care. In fact, I am in favor of socialized medicine to a point in the U.S. I believe in the rights of people, and also believe that corporate America has gotten way too strong, and dictates too much in government.

As far as Bush and his cabinet, the only one that I really have had any respect for in the past, or now is Colin Powell. I'm definitely not a conservative. I'm a member of what could be called a "backlash group," that will no longer tolerate a minority of people dictating what our government will do.

I don't trust Bush any further than you do. In fact, I don't trust politicians in general. To me, term limits, no pac money, no lobbying and "$10,000" a plate fund-raisers should be tolerated. Anyone who spends more than 12 years in the Senate, or 8 years in the House of Representatives has become so engrained in the political crap that it disturbs me.

I believe Bush was hoping that the UN would have enough guts to "force" Saddam Hussein to capitulate, without there being war. France, Germany, and Russia, forced the issue, by their own greed. Had they signed on board, Hussein would have knuckled under to world pressure, disclosed what he obligated himself to, following the Gulf War, and we would have seen the al-Qaeda operations in the North of Iraq removed. If you're looking for a scape-goat, as to why we are at war, look no further than those three "great nations," whose only reason for supporting the man were pure greed.

You don't take the ability to, or will to use, weapons of mass destruction, when the opponent has shown a propensity for having used them, even against his own people. That wouldn't make sense. The threat has to remain there, so the enemy thinks twice about doing it. Rest assured, Hussein would have used WMD already if we had said we wouldn't use them, under any circumstances.

In a state of war, as exists in Iraq, the rules of engagement say that the combatants will be in uniform. Anyone else who fights, in civilian clothes, is considered a guerilla or engaged in espionage, and the country that captures them has the right to stand them against the wall, and execute them. We aren't doing that, despite the fact that Hussein's "faithful" are not only using this as a tool of war, but engaging it's usage in such a manner as to endanger civilians. It is against every convention of war, and only a despot, and people who don't care about human life would stoop to such levels of depravity. If that's the way Fundamentalist Muslims conduct war, I'm afraid I see no reason that they should be shown quarter.

It's easy to judge the past. Why did the U.S. support Hussein in the beginning? It was an era where it was the Soviet Union against the West, and both sides were backing opposition to the other. It's not an issue worth discussion, since neither side really did the right things, but at the time, it seemed like the only viable options. Neither side would allow the other to "rule the world." Since that era has passed, we have to police the crap we caused... on both sides.

The anti-war movement does not care about people. Just saying we should pull out of Iraq is condemnation of millions. You can try to justify it any way you want, but those who have lived under a tyrant would disagree with you. It's time for the world community to rid the surface of the earth of these beasts.

As far as pointing at other nations as "future targets," let's just say one thing. If they harbor terrorists, allow them to operate at will against our friendly nations, and support their cause, I see no reason they should be protected from the wrath of the free world. If that's a message that there may be more nations under the gun, so be it.

Whether or not Res. 1441 was a watered down version or not doesn't matter. What does matter is that Hussein not only violated the accord, he flaunted it in the face of the UN, and nobody had the guts except our coalition, to do one damned thing about it. The UN has totally lost it's focus, and no longer has a reason to exist.

Wolf