Its funny that you trot out this semi-patriotic pseudo idealistic sludge as a retro-active justification for this war.

"You have not been proven right. The Iraq/Al Qaeda link issue is still open, as is the WMD. Just because you want you predictions to be right does not make them right.

Then show me to be wrong.

Two years have passed with 100,000+ boots on the ground. There is no verdict still out. Give it up. You have nothing- but please continue believing what you are told. Its amusing to watch adults act like wind-up dolls.

In response to 'Uranium Enrichment equipment': He had a handful of rusty crap buried in a flower-garden of a retired second-rate scientist, the sum of which wouldn't fill up a small packing box from my local Uhaul vendor. Thats a hell of a thing to base a war on.

"Keep ignoring the evidence. Keep your head in the sand. Considering that Saddam had and used WMD and he had everything needed to make more, you are a fool if you don’t think he was going to make more the first chance he got. "

Nobody doubts Saddam H. had WMD at one point and desired to resurrect his program. What is equally beyond doubt that despite that desire, he had been held in check effectively. The answer to 'first chance he got' was not total war, but continued action to thwart his desires. Despite your endless derision of the UN, they have been shown entirely correct and effective, and your little 'side' has shown to be putzes.

"Fact is they were banned WMD, and they were lethal. If they found thousands of these, will that be enough for you? ."

Yes, in a word. At least to the question of having a WMD program.

Saddam told the UN he got rid of all them

And what makes you think 12 is a threat to the national secutrity of the united states, or anything other than a lost rocket magazine from the Iran-Iraq war 20 years ago (and in which case, we may have made most of those rocket parts and supplied the basics for the SUPPOSED gas in them)?

"What were they doing with it? Where did it come from? Are you comfortable with a madman having a couple of tons of uranium to play with."

A lot of it was actually for old style x-ray machines. Much of it was from their defunct nuclear program. Am I comfortable with madmen having uranium? No, absolutely not, but there are a few dozen madmen and a few dozen more unstable countries, all hostile to the US, all having uranium. Do you suggest they are all legitimate targets for war?

All of this is stupid tactics of mass distraction: You claimed they had WMD, the intent to use it, Al-Qaeda allies to deliver it to and were a threat to the US, they were not. You now are trying to define down the justification for war, but are setting the bar so low that it includes about every third world country. This is idiocy. This is retro-active justification.

I wrote:DL- Point 7: No, there were not. Saying there was doesn't make it so. Unconfirmed Hints and allegations of possible meetings is not 'ties'. Dream on.

Yes there is. There is good evidenced. Saying its not does not make it so. Dream on.

This is puerile debate tactics akin to " nonononono nyeah nyeah". I won't play. There are allegations of meetings (like TWO) between saddam operatives and Al-Qaueda. One of them between Atta and A former colonel of the Iraqui Secret Police in the former checkoslovakia. That one has been proven impossible. The others are so non-specific and non-credible that dates times and actors are not even defined, and appearently, even if they are true, resulted in UBL turning the contact down flatly and bluntly. Even supposing that there had been TWO meetings, that does not make them allies, nor does that make those 'ties'.

You have shit. Dream on.

"You continue to ignore there is good evidence of an Al Qaeda/Iraq link. "

The evidence is less than that for the Yeti or spacre alien abductions. There are no credible documented ties, only allegations that are re-hahed in the New Republic or Fox News every few months. What you have is CBS style Crap Journalism that verges on editorial commentary. Bring some solid documentation to the table, some paper-trail, or do shut up about it. Heck- even the UFO nuts are capable of doing at least that much.

"Right now, there is still evidence of an Iraq/Al Qaeda link that has not been disproven. If it proves that evidence is wrong, then I’ll accept that. Will you accept if it turns out to be right?"

Sure I will. But I am not aware of any 'evidence' that has not been disproven. You certainly have not brought any to the table.

"With WMD, I know they are still searching the sands of Iraq. Last I heard they were searching. Seeing that Iraq had everything needed to make WMD, and seeing that Saddam had and used WMD to kill thousands, IMO we were just for making sure he would never do it again. "

The absence of anything can not be proven decisevly, you fool. And we did not go to war because saddam might reconstitute is program, but because he HAD. Again, you change the reason for the war after the fact. And as hope fades for any chance of WMD or Nuke program, or Solid terrorist ties, your thin drivel sounds more and more like this propaganda:

"How many people died for the freedom you inherited. You may not think bringing freedom to Iraq is worth it. You do not see how a free Iraq could end terrorism coming from the Middle East or you would see a value in this fight."

If you think you can bring freedom to another people by shooting at them and blowing them up, then you are a fool. If you think the founding fathers would have indulged this massacre, then you are an even bigger fool. If you think that Iraq is going to emerge from this, barring a MASSIVE re-organization of the resources and efforts we are putting forth, a pillar of middle-eastern democracy, then you are the biggest fool I have ever met. Such an outcome would have been possible, but has been squandered.

"I have considered I might be wrong. I have tried to keep an open mind and listen to both sides. Do you? I have seen no evidence of that.
"

Don't make me laugh, and don't lie to yourself. You have no more considered the possibility that this was the wrong thing to do than Saddam H. indulged in kind acts of charity. Your insistance that this was the only, most correct and most noble thing to do has been invariant, the only thing that has changed has been the drivel, shit journalism and innuendo that you have used to justify it.

Davin L.