Apparently most of us (Americans) aren't convinced we should go to war with Iraq. I guess I am not as alone as I felt. I think most of us acknowledge Hussein is a tyrant that should not be in command of a country. We also acknowledge that his regime is oppressive to the Iraqi people and could be a threat to the gulf region (notice I don't believe they are a threat to America.) But the fact is, have they (the regime) developed WMD's that are a threat to America? We haven't seen any evidence of that yet. It is not enough to go to war, plain and simple. I don't buy the argument that we can't wait for them to park a nuclear bomb at the front of the White House. That is purely alarmist propaganda.

Now, if it has been decided that we (the U.S.) must build a new Middle Eastern nation (or republic) and that toppling Saddam is the first "domino" in that plan, that is a different story altogether. In this era of unilateralism (the U.S. being the sole superpower) and with China poised to become the second world superpower (thus leading us into another era of bilateralism) perhaps the powers that be have decided that only a multi-lateral world order can ensure peace and economic survival for industrialized nations. Perhaps then Dubya's efforts can be thought of as not getting revenge for Saddam's assasination attempt against George Sr. but rather completing his father's vision of the "New World Order" (proclaimed after the fall of the Berlin wall.)

http://www.charlotte.com/mld/charlotte/4758302.htm