Hi Splinx,

Where is the evidence he's "encouraging terrorists"? And even if it exists, does that really consitute casus belli?

Hell yes! What's the alternative? Let Saddam continue to laugh at diplomatic pressures of being a kinder/gentler ruler? Despite current sanctions Saddam has been raking in money from legal and illegal oil sales (for many years) that could have surly pay for needed medicine and food for all the people of Iraq. Instead he is spending it on himself and who knows what else (soon to be disclosed). Saddam is a ruthless murder who sneaks around diplomatic policies. 9/11 has changed things and I think it would be foolish to just wait around for the next blow (to any country).

IMO the evidence is being withheld as to not compromise sources and people who might be murdered like the fate of his relatives (son-in-law) who blew the whistle on Saddam's illegal programs.

After all, under President Carter, for example, Zbigniew Brzezinski unleashed a campaign of mischief-making in the erstwhile USSR's central Asian republics, policies formalized and continued under Pres. Reagan which led to Afghanistan, el Qaeda, and the whole current mess.

What were we to do, let Russia have there way in Afghanistan? They sure were not listening to NATO concerns and diplomatic policies.
OK, so the plan didn't work because we ignored Afghanistan after Russia was defeated. I still don't think the US is to blame for some Islamic radicals that wanted to run Afghanistan in there own sick way. For me the lesson justifies our current policies. See the job through, for the sake of decent humans for a chance to live peacefull/sane lifes.

We are trying to be careful, the UN is involved and wow, so far they agree with the US.

The UN sucks, NATO rules. I wish someone would do a results page on the actions taken by the UN and NATO to see whose ruling body actualy makes a difference when confronting conflicts.

SteveS