The Golden Horde ready to come down YOUR street

[River Song]

what I find vaguely amusing is that when anyone submits a contrary opinion, the mob turns against them which is what is happening here.

I respect that my view is not a popular one but I have a right to express it (although the discussion is far off topic now). I get tired of people who think that the west can do no right and are guilty by definition.

As far as the comments about flying harveys bristol cream bottles that gets as close to a personal attack as it gets. The ONLY and I repeat ONLY person who has at least tried to engage with the debate is NR whose question I will try and answer to the best of my abilities.

The reason why we get involved is something called the Genocide Convention. We are OBLIGED without any further notification to act. Britian is a major player whether you think so or not. Most of you are speaking just like any other anarchist unwashed members of the anti war movement.

Imagine if we had listened to the counsel of the so-called anti-war movement. Saddam Hussein would be the owner and occupier of Kuwait. Bosnia would be part of Slobodan Milosevics greater Serbia. Kosovo would be ethnically cleansed and annexed. The Taliban would still be in power in Afghanistan, and al Qaeda would still be their guests. And Hussein would still be terrorizing people in a state most aptly described as a concentration camp above ground and a mass grave below.

If I had such a bad record, I wouldnt be demanding explanations from those of us who said its about time we stopped capitulation to dictatorship, racism, aggression, and totalitarian ideologies. We did not want to allow the failures of Rwanda, Bosnia, and Afghanistan and elsewhere repeated in Iraq.

The war was both just and necessary. Iraq had lost its sovereignty as far as a state can under international law. It participated in regular aggressions or occupations of territory, violated the letter and spirit of the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty, violated the Genocide Convention, and played host to international terrorists. Its sovereignty was at an end.

Iraq was under international sanctions; it was a ward of the international community. Its people were being starved to build palaces for their psychopathic dictator. The Baath Party fueled ethnic hatreds with a policy of divide and rule. An imploded state would have made things worse. Do you know who would have invaded then? Turkey would have invaded to take Kurdistan. Iran would have invaded to support its extremist proxies, and Saudi Arabia would have intervened to do the same favour for the Sunni and Wahhabi extremists. In fact, all those powers are trying to meddle in Iraq now. But we are fortunate, as are the Iraqi people, that there is a coalition to hold the ring and prevent it from becoming another Rwanda or another Congo. Intervention was the only responsible course.

We know and we make no secret of the extraordinary difficulties that have attended this noble, risky, and worthwhile enterprise. We have seen the abysmal consequences of that, but we have the responsibility of imagining what the alternative would be. The positive consequences are many. A federal, democratic Iraqi constitution has been debated now on six television channels and in perhaps 100 newspapers, in a country where three years ago it was deathfor you and your familyto possess a satellite dish or to attempt to distribute a leaflet. Not a quick death either.

Iraq used chemical and biological weapons against Iran and its own inhabitants several times. It went to great lengths to conceal its programs. Hussein lieutenant Tariq Aziz, Galloways best friend, offered then chief U.N. weapons inspector Rolf Ekeus $2 million to doctor his findings. Dummy sites were constructed for U.N. fools to inspect. Material was moved and buried, and scientists were intimidated and told that their families would be killed if they cooperated with any inspection. With this knowledge, who would have given Hussein the benefit of the doubt if he said hes no longer fooling around with weapons? What responsible leader of any democracy could face his people if that bet turned out to be wrong?

Also, dont forget about Libya. Not everything about Libyas abandonment of its weapons of mass destruction can be attributed to the intervention in Iraq, but it should be noted that when Col. Muammar el-Qaddafi wanted to capitulate, he did not approach U.N. Secretary-General Kofi Annan or that great French statesman Jacques Chirac, nor German Chancellor Gerhard Schroeder. He came to British Prime Minister Tony Blair and to George W. Bush and said, Im out of this game now. Thats not nothing.

But hey ho - what do I know !