[jaguar]

Klinton? Well there is a biting political statement if I ever heard one. Wish i could make head or tail of it.

Finally, I think that most of the public in the US does not want to stampede over Iraq and kill thousands of servicemen, women and children. What we fear is that Iraq will build some really nasty weopons and , as we have recently seen, use them against us. We believe Saddam can't be trusted and we need to use force becuase the wimps at the UN wont. Why even HAVE the UN if they cant enforce their OWN resolutions?

Thankyou for demonstrating your lack of understanding of the United Nations.
The UN is by definition a powerless body, it relies on the will of member states to enforce any resolution passed, how such a resolution may be enforced depends under which part of the UN charter the resolution sits. On of Isreal's arguments with its own noncompliance is that its resolutions are under a different part to the ones on Iraq.

Full assembly UN resolutions are more often proxy political statements than motions that are designed to be enforced, the serious business goes on in the Security Council.
I assume by 'wimpy' you are referring to the sanctions, well the reality is that many countries want to do business with Iraq, including allies of America, why? Because nation states don't give a flying fuck about ethics. Now if you're definition of a strong enforced resolution is bombing trucks full of British cigarettes I really am going to have to start wondering about your rather naive view of politics.

I'm yet to see why Iraq would want to bomb the US with chem/bio weapons, i keep silly this rather jingoistic argument and yet even the CIA are saying the risk is bloody miniscule. Saddam is not, contrary to popular opinion some kind of raving loony, he is an intelligent, if despicable political survivor who wants to keep surviving, bombing the US is not a wise way of doing this. As for using them as a cover for an invasion, the same applies, in the short term it might work but it will be his demise. I'm also yet to see any evidence of nuclear development even. So mon ami show me evidence that a: Saddam is crazy b: That Saddam supports terrorism. Or do they fit into the catagory of right wing arcane knowledge?

The parameters for this debate as set my Bush and his echo, Blair is that, without any evidence to support their claims, Iraq has WMDs. (Not WOMDs, learn how to form an acronym)While I'd be surprised if he doesn't the result of this is that if they do find WMDs in Iraq, he's evil and should be taken out, and if they don't then he's hiding them and is evil and should be taken out. It's simple political ploy I'm sure will be put into use as soon as the inspections start.

Is tom Dascle left wing.YES!

Left wing? In the US maybe.

You left wingers may have had fun patting yourselves on the back bashing the Iraqi war/ Republicans/ Bush but you are in the minority now. Sorry.

Maybe in the US. But you're missing griff's point. The spectrum of people that do not support a war on Iraq extends into your own military and intel organisations, what does that say? People in the know, with an intimate understanding of war and world politics think a war with Iraq is a foolish idea. Look I'm saying 50/50 a war with Iraq comes off, and all the hawks can jump up and down and watch bombs hitting buildings live on CNN and crow about being in the majority all they want as far as I care, its still a stupid move.

Why do you see the Democratic Party as "the enemy"...or as I might call it, "the man?"

hehehehehe