>>I come here to debate because I'm bored. I know I'm right,
>>and I know those on my side are right.
>
>So confident, arent we? Ahh, Rome was too. I hear they
>turned out fine.

Different world, different power.

> When this is all said
>>and done, it will be apparent to the world that we were in
>>the right, and those on your side were severly mistaken.
>
>Who is "we"? You and your imaginary friend?

That's the best you could come up with?

>>You express the same view as France for Christ sake. The
>>same France who turned their head when Hitler was building
>>his evil regime in Germany. Like France, you are all about
>>the United Nations, who since it's inception in 1945 has
>>only backed up their resolutions by force twice, once in
>>Korea, the other time in Iraq in 91.
>
>
>You support this body
>>who has Lybia as head of the Commission on Human Rights, and
>>Iraq as head of the disarmament comittee. You support this
>>body who has failed time and time again. Allowing genocide
>>to take place in Yugolsavia, allowing 800,000 to be
>>slaughtered in Rwanda. Then you say baseless bullshit like
>>"Why rush to war", when the UN has thrown 15 resolutions at
>>Iraq over the last 11 years, and Saddam has defied each and
>>every one of them.
>
>
>More assumptions... only I doubt they don't apply to the two
>people you were addressing because I don't think either of
>them give a damn about france, the UN or whether saddam is
>disarmed or not. You dont know anyones specific opinions on
>specific topics and instead make offbase assumptions built
>off your perception of the narrowminded, "us vs. them"
>mentality. How sad.

That's what it is. If you don't support disarming Saddam, for whatever reason, you are "them"

>Then you come with this "Unilateral"
>>argument, when nothing about this campaign is unilateral.
>
>Only 4 nations specifically involved in military combat (all
>of whom are western and very specific allies) and this ISNT
>unilateral?

Look up the word in the dictionary.

>>Your whole anti-war "movement" is predicated on nonsense and
>>anybody with a moderate intelligence level can see that.
>
>I guess most of the world, and not to mention 30-50%
>americans have no intelligence.

That's about right.