You make some good points. Let me begin by saying that we can agree
to disagree and as for the name calling, I, like you, am frustrated
with the arguments I hear from the other side of the issue (as you
are with my side). I don't like to call names, as that does not
really ever solve anything, but does show a lack of real substance
to ones viewpoint.

Now on to your comments. "A non-violent ex-military person.
Hmmm, forgive me if I am a little scepcical about this." Okay,
let me say this a different way. I'm not the type of person who for
the sake of violence would use violence. I spent 8 years in the
U.S. Army and never shot at anyone, thank God. However, if I had
been sent to a combat zone, I would have gone and fought as hard as
I could have. I am not against violence if that is the only way
to keep another dangerous, aggressively violent person from hurting
me, my family or other innocents. You see, I liken this to a situation
where you're walking down the street and you see a gang of thugs
raping a young girl. Am I supposed to just walk over to them and
explain how their behavior is wrong and that should consider the girls
feelings? No, of course not. I would call the police, to be sure, but
that doesn't immediately help the girl, does it. If the thugs refused
to leave her alone, what choice does one have except for violence?

War has its place. By now you must have seen the reports of Iraqi
citizens dancing in the streets and tearing down the statues and paintings
of Saddam. Doesn't that tell you something? These people are that
young girl I just spoke of. For the first time in most of their lives,
these people have a real hope to live without the fear of deadly
retaliation from their government.

"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..." I have already addressed this issue earlier, but you
have to admit, the A-10 comment was funny.

"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." Again, I have addressed this already. But
I would not characterize myself as "non-violent." However, to
characterize me as violent implies that I would, as a normal course
of action, use violence to solve the problems in my life. That is
not true. You see, I don't think you can say that someone is violent
because they think that a given war is justified. I think violence
is the only thing that some people understand. Saddam and his minions
are such people. Do you honestly believe that he would have ever just
complied or given up? Please don't tell me that you do. If so, then
you're naive beyone reality. That isn't meant to be a personal attack,
but a qualified observation based upon the premise I stated.

"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?

I guess I would have to say I'm referring to U.S. laws. But I mean
to say people other than those like Saddam and the scumbag thugs that
used to help him.

"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."
Okay, I agree that non-violence does not a coward make....unless that
non-violence is done out of fear. I'm not saying that is the case
for you, but it is for some. Some people would rather try to appease
someone like Saddam than force him to comply. Again, people like him
only understand one thing: force. All the sanctions did was make
the Iraqi people suffer. Saddam went on living like a king, while his
people starved. How in the world would you or anyone else expect him
to somehow capitulate when his lifestyle hasn't changed a lick from the
UN sanctions? He ignored the UN when it was convenient for him and used
them when it suited his purposes. He really thought that if he delayed
long enough that the U.S. would just get tired and go away. Guess what?
He was wrong and I guess you would have to say "dead wrong."

"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."

Wow. There is so much here. It is a good opinion and I am entitled
to it. I am a huge proponent of free speech and if were an American
citizen, I would fully support your right to engage in such. (Where are
you from, anyway?). I say that tongue and cheek. Of course I support
free speech and you can disagree with me however you like. And I
reserve the right to disagree with you, as well. Who said that
America was perfect? Not me. Can you name for me one country that is?
No, because every country is full of imperfect people. The US is full
of problems, but the ones you state are not unique to this country.
In fact, you talk of racism. It is my opinion that we've done and
continually do more to address this problem than any other country
on earth. Poverty? We have 280 million people. Not all of them are going
to live outside of poverty. But for you to that it "surpasses 3rd
World levels in some areas is ludicrous. I have been to the poorest
part of the country of Panama. I have never seen anyplace in America
that looks like that. The closest level would probably be Appalachia.
These are mountain people who to a large extent have not integrated
into the rest of society, don't value education and frankly, don't
have much prospect of industry moving in the area because of a lack
of a qualified workforce. It is sad, but not 3rd wordly. Our foreign
policy? I think our foreign policy has just been demonstrated. You
pose a real threat to us, you are putting yourself in mortal danger.
We aren't isolationist. We give more money to more countries every year
than most of the rest of the world combined. When a disaster happens
in another country, what people immediately donate from their own personal
means to the relief cause? Us. The reality is this. We are the only
Superpower left in the world, we are the richest country and therefore, like
most people, sports teams, etc. at the top, we are hated by those who
aren't. It really doesn't matter what we do to help, we won't get credit
for it by those that just hate us. I, for one, will always be against
letting a group like the UN, full of anti-American countries and people,
dictate our foreign policy. Everyone wanted to see us fail in Iraq and
now they have to eat their words because the Iraqis are dancing in
the streets and elated at what the US, Britain and Australia (among
others) have done for them. Oh, and what country doesn't base their
foreign policy on what's best for them? All countries do.

And you sarcastically mention the American Dream as some kind of farce.
That just shows how naive you are, not me. I have an investor in
my company that is the son of Romanian immigrants. He started a
company 20 years ago from scratch, with no money, but tons of determination
and grew it to a publicly traded, $300 million corporation that employs
more than 1000 people. That, my friend, is the American Dream. A
Romanian immigrant who is now a multi-millionaire all because he
lived in a place that allowed him the freedom to pursue a dream.
If you would like, I could give you list of 100 people of have similar
stories: white, black, asian, american, hispanic, etc., etc. Living
in American doesn't guarantee you will live the good life. It just
guarantee that you will have a chance if you are willing to pursue a
dream.

Since you're not a capitalist, you probably don't understand that
type of thinking. That's not meant to be an insult. Capitalism affords
the average person the opportunity to improve his lot in life in
a way that no other economic system can. Communism is an unmitigated
failure everywhere it is tried. Not calling you a communist, just making
a comparison.

"Sure democracy works for you but it is not perfect and it might not work
for them..." I guess we won't know until they are given the chance
to try it out for themselves, will we? I can tell you this, whatever
they do, it will be an improvement over what they have had for the last
couple of decades.