[joeyman]

The Peace Lobby has no real right to tell everyone to shut up.

I agree. If you look at the responses on this thread, you'll see that the only ones who seem to want people to shutup (ck out longcut's remark (lead follow or step aside) are the pro war crowd.

And yes I do think we'd be much safer if we don't go to war because of the escalation potential to WWIII.

[Long Cut]

I'm glad you're "sorry" those people died. Now how about ENRAGED? Enraged against their killers and their clients?

The ONLY way to ensure that no such outrages, or worse, occur again is to systematically destroy any individual, group, or nation that was complicit in them. This includes Iraq, whose dictator publicly praised the terrorists responsible for 9-11. Those who don't think he was involved are in serious need of some streetsmarts and a reality check.

"I do think we'd be much safer IF WE DIDN'T GO TO WAR because of the escalation potential to WWIII"

See one of my previous posts. We ARE ALREADY AT WAR! It's been "game on" now for over a year, or didn't you notice? And please, don't bust me up with the "WWIII" rhetoric. The Soviet Union no longer exists, and THAT boogyman's been dead for 12 years.

And I did not tell you to "shut up". I said that there are three options: help out, stay out of the way, or help the Bad Guys. Sorry, but no middle ground exists. The fact is that the naysaying, the pacifism, the continual demands for evidence (already provided, more than enough) have the effect, intended or not of helping the enemy. Do you think they do not?

I guess it's okay, though. They didn't attack YOUR town, so why worry? Man, do you REALLY not see this?

[knighthawk]

It's not we are going to war because we like it. Saddam has to be removed. He is a timebomb. To his own people, to Israel and to the US. Saddam will not play nice all the time. Just imagine he will get nukes.

We can simply do what the Europeans did with Hitler, or act now.

[wretchard]

"And yes I do think we'd be much safer if we don't go to war because of the escalation potential to WWIII.

Nothing will be clear, except in hindsight, but we must decide in uncertainty. Our Congressional leaders will have to declare themselves, as you have done and as longcut has. To act or not to act. And to do nothing is also to act.

Are avoiding the mistakes of Munich? Or are we caught up in the mad rush to war of 1914? I cannot pretend to know the answer, but I will make certain observations. The first is that the war you seek to avoid has already begun, certainly the first clash of arms was felt on September 11, 2001.

"Gentlemen may cry, Peace, Peace! But there is no peace. The war is actually begun!"

My second problem is that any anti-war position would require me to regard most Muslims as liars, and to continue to regard them as fools or children who never mean what they say. Almost any Islamic site you care to visit will banner the words "Jihad". I can either treat this as a monstrous joke or take them at their word.

I would much rather not go to war with them, but they say and repeatedly say that they are at war with us. Are they liars or fools? Or are they men who can fly airplanes and do chemistry and nuclear physics? The evidence, it seems to me, is that they can fly airplanes and (as proved by Pakistan) do nuclear physics. Why should I doubt them when they plainly say, "I want to kill you, kuffar"?

For these reasons, I feel uneasy about concluding, as you have done, that we will be safer if we do nothing. I cannot claim to know the future. But I will never forgive myself for eliding the seemingly obvious.