[Jimbo]

WOW! Where to start? Guess I'll begin with your ending and work my way back if I can last that long.

Mark wrote "Thirdly, I believe that we need multilateral support to start a war, and it should be used as a last resort. What makes me suspicious of the Bush administrations motives is how quickly he wants to go to war to remove Saddam. Why do we need multilateral support? And since we already do have this why don't you just say you feel we need unanimous support? War as a last resort makes sense to me unless you mean untill Saddam dies of old age and sponsors some specific terrorist threats that are successful in the future? In my opinion after 10 years of waiting we are at the last resort so, BOMBS AWAY!
How quickly Bush wants to go to war with Iraq eh? If we do it in 6 months does this make it ok? How about 12 months? Still too soon? Ok after the next presidential election? Oh drats, looks like you will prefer to wait for Hillarys arrival on the scene in 2008. You act like this just started, my gosh this has gone on for over a decade (8 years with Clinton). Isn't enough ever enough Mark?

Next: "Powell produced photographs that show how Saddam is moving the alleged weapons of mass distruction. My question is why was this information not turned over to the weapons inspectors?" Were you not watching TV Mark? They were moving this stuff around in mobile trucks and clearing the sites prior to the inspections. Would you prefer we sent 8x10 glossys to Saddam via color fax directly?

Next: "It was noted that his speech did not have any influence on changing opinions of other countries." It was noted by whom? These same "biased" news agencies you condemn in the rest of your post? The reports I saw denoted no less than 15 additional nations who were "on the fence" agreed that Saddam was in violation of the latest UN resolution and more serious steps should be taken. Unlike the French who thinks this means tripling the number of duped inspectors these other countries understand what the "serious consequences" stated in the original resolution was intended to mean.

Next: "The BBC World news interviewed a french official who stated his opinion is still the same. Gee, this is so hard to imagine! The French still have their own economic interests in mind over the safety of the region and perhaps the rest of the world. This is not news Mark, this is the French status quo in action.

Lastly: "By the way, the BBC was the only major broadcast news outlet that actually interviewed a US senator that did not change his opinion based on Powell's presentation. He was firmly against war with Iraq unless the US gets multilateral approval from the UN. Gee let me guess this was newsworthy, a lone Democrat in disagreement with the majority position. Heck even your beloved Senator Feinstein agreed that the inspections are proving useless and it does not appear further inspections will serve any useful function. Coming from Ms. Liberal Panties herself this is a resounding endorsement of Colin Powells presentation and of the Presidents policy. I suppose you have watched each and every newscast in the world the last 48 hours and will testify this to be true?


There may be several more point to clarify from your post but I haven't the time nor the inclination to beat my head against the wall any longer.