>Balsa wood drones, missles that have a range of 150 Miles,
>and aluminum tubes to DO NOT = weapons of mass destruction.

true. he probably doesn't have these considering we have evidence that he is trying to get the resources necessary to build them...but that doesn't retract from the truth that he has chemical weapons (as you said) that he is willing to use, even upon his own people. consider also that he signed agreements to remove those things from his arsenal, and he has not. the UN was in agreement then that he had to do so. the world community essentially judged him then. the problem today lies in the fact that those same people are unwilling to commit to the enforcement of it.

>Rather than be presented with the manichean choice of
>disarmament or invasion, there is a third option;
>containment. It has worked (rather sadistically and
>unjustly) on Cuba and it could work here.

define "worked". if you mean that the embargo's with Cuba have succeeded in crippling a people while still allowing their leader to remain in power and continue to opress them, then yeah. Consider a Cuba without Castro (and no embargo). You'd see Cuba come back to being a country of wealth as they were back in the day. Granted Castro was a great source of that uprising (educating the people, gaining their independence), but he has proven himself over time as a tyrant, opressing and murdering dissidents, etc. these are not the actions of a man with the interest of the people in mind.

>The only remaining question would be; "How do we relieve the
>suffering of the Iraqi people under Saddam's rule?"
>
>The answer lies in partitioning.

although this sounds like a good idea on the surface, don't you think that this would require a strong military presence to enforce, one that would last a heck of a lot longer than this war is going to require? And in the process further build a deeper hatred for a country that many people in that region of the world believe unfairly imposes itself on the world already? We can't just go in there and tell people "We'll control the Southern part of the country so all you Sadaam haters come live with us." If that were the case, we'd essentially have a 51st state.

once again, I want to assert that I am not pro this war necessarily. but this doesn't seem like a good solution to me either. imho of course.

--rhombus