Thanks for explaining yourself in this post. I had not read the other threads.
I agree with you in your reasoning, but I do disagree with your conclusion only in that I believe that we have a serious threat (as do the Iraqi people) that must be dealt with now, rather than later.
While I have no respect for the leftist idiots, I do respect your opposition because it is based on principle rather than meaningless platitudes spouted by those who would love to see our way of life destroyed.
Also, I like the way way you have maintained your composure despite some heated and passionate posts to you.
Thank you for a polite, well reasoned response. I don't mind that you disagree with my conclusion. I think once those who support the war see that not everyone who has some objections is in-line with the Hollyweirdos, we can have reasonable discussions as to what a solution for the "Iraq problem" can be and each other can have the opportunity to explain their ideas and rationale.
I actually may come around to support military action if we can wait and see what happens next. Im not a fan myself of these inspections, but I still dont see why war has to be right now - and by right now, I mean that almost literally. I maye be convinced six months from now if Iraq refuses to destroy weapons. It seems this is being rushed, and I can't see the reason. I understand that some do see a reason, but IMO, what is Iraq going to do in the next six months that they couldn't have done in the last ten years? Their refusal to destroy weapons and the means of making them, combined with past hostile actions, would be reason enough for a coalition to say, "That's it, we are comming for you Saddam". They would then be an obvious threat to all.