Davin wrote:
What the intel branches were telling Clinton in 98, 5 years ago, is one thing... What we killed 10-15,000 people over in 2003 IS quite another. Shit happens, things change we all know this.

Tom replied:
If you can come up with ANY plausible scenario for Saddam's WMDs and production programs "evaporating" between then and now, and after that, while surrounded by armed force, having him stonewall the U.N. when they ask for proof of its evaporation, I'd love to hear it.

Davin rejoins:
I don't have to. I make no claims about WMD existing in Iraq at any point. That I deny they exist now, and that I alledge that claims concerning their existence are either incomptence or fraud does not mean I have to provide a full accounting for their existence or their history- I didn't start a war over their existence, you and yours did. So you go do the math and accounting- I don't give a flying f. You are saying we had the right to kill people, not me.

Again, for the fourth time, you are trying to pass the buck. I don't give a shit waht folks who DIDN'T KILL PEOPLE OVER THESE PUTATIVE WMD THOUGHT- because, well, they didn't kill people.

Davin wrote:
"And lets stipulate that we could have been mistaken in 1998 AND mistaken in 2003."

Tom replied:
"Possible, sure. I don't buy it though. Given all the data and reports I've seen that are publicly available, it's hard to believe that all of what I saw was misinterpreting innocent activities. In any case, you would still have to discard the "Bush lied" scenario. A mistake is not a lie."

Davin rejoins:
Tom- what the hell. If I pull a gun and shoot you dead and claim "well, I THOUGHT he had a knife" that does not make me morally absolved.

So, Bush can do whatever he wants, as long as he claims it was a "mistake"

Bull- f'ing shit.

You kill 15,000 people, you better have an air-tight reason. If you don't- its 10-15,000 cases of manslaughter in the leats, or murder in the worst.

Or are they just some sort of Untermenschen to you? Not worth living? 'Oh- Well- It was A MISTAKE- afterall, the man only had the NSA, CIA, FBI, NRO, and Military Intel at his disposal'...

Davin wrote:
We were wrong that WMD existed- the claims that there were sure terrorist connections were neither sure nor connections.

Tom Replied:
"No WMD existed in the time just before we started moving in on Iraq last year? This is proven to your satisfaction now? Absolutely? :"

Yep, well, you want to start a war? The burden of proof is on you. Thats just the way it works.

Tom wrote:
"It isn't faith, it's common sense"

Bullshit. Its 6th sense, navel gazing and supposition

Tom wrote:
"We know Saddam had connections with terrorists in general"

Again I challenge you: provide proof or shut the F up. Worse, wear the badge of liar. Provide proof or state that you are a lying. You can claim this from now until eternity. You can stomp around like a child for all I care. If you don't have proof, I'm not buying. If you don't have proof, its just another space-alien claim. If you don't have proof, its just anomalism.

Tom wrote:
"even if specific connections with the Al Quaeda group have not been solidly proved."

So, its true in absence of evidence and regardless of it being proved or disproved.

Like I said. Faith and Bullhit.

"The fact that he cheated on his wife, and in the Oval Office, says something about his character,"

The fact that this administration killed 10-15,000 people off of flimsy anorexic comic-book yeti-loving crap should say something to you. If it doesn't, mr. Brosz, then you are a hypocrite.

"maximum of about 7,200 civilian"

A minimum, actually of about 5,000 civilian deaths with a cap of 10,000 by all reasonability. And 5,000 military minimum to 10,000 military.

I take the mean, at about 10-15,000.

Or are Iraqis worth 4/5ths a human being to you? Not worth your political faith?

They certainly appear worth less than your political faith, based on your concerns.

I'm done. Iv'e tried fact- which you failed to adequately refute. Ive tried reason, which you refused to allow to overcome your faith. I've tried testing your principles- which seem to have loop-holes.

I'm done with you on this issue.

Davin L.