"As for people with my temperment not having guns, you're wrong. I'm exactly
who should have a gun. I'm a non-violent person by nature who
would only use my gun for the defense of my family. And yes, if
I thought there was a gang of thugs hanging out around the corner
who were willing to come and kill my family and I knew it, then you
better believe I would get them first. I guess you would just let
them come on over and kill you, rape your wife (although I doubt
seriously that you have a wife - maybe I should say your "life
partner")and kill your little brother or sister (since you obviously
wouldn't have kids of your own)."

A non-violent ex-military person. Hmmm, forgive me if I am a little scepcical about this.

First of all, I would like to apologise for any personal attacks that I have made in previous posts. I get a little carried away sometimes. Moreover, I refuse to rise to your taunts. They say much more about you than they do about me. As for your quip about the A-10...

Secondly, I am confused by the idea of a non-violent person making a pre-emptive strike. That is not non-violence. By definition you would be using violence. One must be one or thie other in this particular argument I think. Ghandi, to my mind, is an example of a non violent person. His use of non-violent protest aided the freedom of thousands of people. Although confronted with violence he preferred passive resistance, and debate.
I do not believe that relatively intelligent, reasoned world leaders have to be compelled to use force to ensure compliance.
It has sent a message around the world that the UN has no value or that several of its members treat it with little respect. On one hand we say to Saddam that you should obey the ruling that we have voted on, on the other hand we ignore the same ruling body.
I am not anti-American, (actually , I am anti-capitalist...so perhaps i am, but that makes me anti the ideology and not the people). I am just frustrated...and don't believe a damn thing that I am told about this war. Both sides have been caught lying, neither side is to be believed. History will be the judge , no doubt, as to what this conflict is really about. It sure as hell isn't about terrorism in totality, not about Saddam (dictators by nature are not nice, that is what makes them dictators) either as there are many more out there that are equally if not more "evil". Perhaps they are next?

"This issue isn't about if you're fit to live in the same world
as the MIGHTY USA or any other law abiding person. That is not up
for debate. You have me all wrong, and perhaps, it is my fault."
I have one question about this. Who's laws are you referring to?

"You see, some people say that war never solves anything, but I
say its cowardice that never solves anything."

I totally agree that cowardice solves nothing. Bravery does not presuppose violence. Many brave people have used civil disobedience and other non-viololent methods. Non-violence does not a coward make.

"We are, in my opinion, the
greatest nation ever created on this planet. We are a kind, giving
people that has always helped the rest of the world: in spite of
how they really feel about us. We are the land of opportunity.
That's why people come here by the droves: opportunity to live the
American dream."

Good opinion and you are entitled to it. As you clearly are a supporter of free speech then you will not object to me disagreeing with you. The United States is by no means perfect. There is de facto racism and segregation and poverty that surpasses 3rd World levels in some areas. The foreign policy (when the administration has admitted to having one) is isolationist unless home interests are effected. The American Dream seems just that. From some of your remarks, I don't believe that you are that naive.

"You see the same God you refer to
as saying "turn the other cheek" also said there is a time for
everything: a time for war and a time for peace. A time for living
and a time to die, etc."

I think that mis-quote is taken out of context. It should read "...a time to be born, and a time to die; a time to plant, and a time to pluck up that which is planted." The time for dying that is referred to it the one that inevitable one, not one that is necessitated by conflict. Ecclesiastes 3 (for that is that passage that you refer to) was in fact most likely written by Solomon (not God) and does say (as you point out) that everything has its place, given by God. If you believe that all other options were used up and the "time for war" is now, then I guess you are entitled to that opinion. I have a different reading.
Sure democracy works for you but it is not perfect and it might not work for them...
Gospel of Thomas(26) "Jesus said: You see the mote which is in your brother's eye; but you do not see the beam which is in your own eye. When you cast out the beam from your own eye, then you will see (clearly) to cast out the mote from your brother's eye."