[Iron_Ranger]

Originally posted by Timber Loftis: IR, assuming this story is written by a for-real source and not just some polemico pretender - and I think it is for-real, given that the CSM didn't report the name for good reason - then you have changed me from: Somewhat in support of action in Iraq, but skeptical as to proof, to Very in support of action in Iraq, because while country's should be allowed self-determination such abuse of its citizens is against every human rights convention ever imagined. What?!? I am not sure where you get either of these ideas of my stance towards the war. If giving a link puts determins where you stand, that certaintly changed somethings. But, this has nothing to do with whether or not we've found WoMD's. It's a separate and distinct reason to make war. If only the administration didn't pretend there was a narrow reason.

Of course it has nothing to do with his WoMD, I never said it did. The artical its self is pure speculation, it says, what if the protest changed the minds of the Bush adminatration, witch they wont anyway. I am not saying this artical is proof we should go to war. I said exacley what I thought, it was interesting. It the artical pro-war rhetoric? Yeah? Whats your point?

[ 02-27-2003, 05:43 PM: Message edited by: Iron_Ranger ]