Donald,

You prefer that Frederic NOT reply, and he will do as he wishes. I couldn't let your response pass.

I too found your thread title repugnant - essentially expressing GLEE at the imminence of WAR - but I have been working hard to hold back any comments. Yours here put me over the edge though.

Frankly, your use of "Let's roll" vastly CHEAPENS the essence of those words. Where they meant (roughly) 'it is time to do what has to be done to protect whoever they are after' you now use them to say 'let's go obliterate Iraq'. No comparison my friend, no comparison at all!

You say "...endless discussion of our national security...". YOUR national security? Threatened by an Iraq that is starved and hardly militarized any more and split in three and overrun by U.N. Inspectors?? What a crock of CRAP!
The following has come to light regarding the proof offered at the United Nations of Iraq's WMD possession and links with Al-Qaida:
1) the photos of chemical weapons depots showing work on chemical weapons that is gone the next day turned out to be taken weeks apart. And who knows what was in the buildings/trucks?
2) the proof that Iraq has bought uranium from an African country were shown to be counterfeit documents by the U.N. inspectors and stated as such in the Security Council.
3) Attempts to confirm a meeting in Czechoslovakia between an Iraqi big-wig and the highjacking ring-leader have proven fruitless and NO MEETING was ever held there, by them.
4) That the high-grade aluminium tubing is applicable to processing uranium has been flatly countermanded by the U.N. Inspectors who have actually seen them and touched them.
In addition there are claims of Al-Qaida training camps in Iraq, but consistent failure to mention that the camp(s) in question are in the northern no-fly zone and OUT OF SADDAM's control. Oddly, that area is under at least potential U.S. control and has been for years!

I haven't heard Iran or Turkey or Saudi Arabia or Qatar or Yemen or Bahrain or Syria or Jordan or Kuwait crying out for U.N. help because they were worried about threats from Iraq, at least not until the U.S. started to make an issue out of things.

There is a cabal of people who have attained powerful positions in the U.S. government/military who have had Iraq in their sights since 1992 and they are now about to reap their objective. Just watch the smirks on Richard Perle's and Paul Wolfowitz's faces as they 'discuss' the situation in TV interviews in the last few days.
I don't think that the uniformed military was/is totally in favour of this action, but the cabal NEEDS it so that they can check-out/improve upon the arsenal of new weaponry that they now possess for later use in more dangerous campaigns. This will be a cake-walk BUT they will get good insight on their GPS-guided weapons and their new internet-based systems for assets-tracking and friendly-fire avoidance and countless other new toys!
The cabal has long declared that an institution like the U.N. can only get in the way of their own objectives.

It is ONLY the U.S. that 'fears' IRAQ. Iraq's neighbours have no fear. Iraq's sworn enemies have no fear. Other countries subject to terrorist activities (and there are plenty) have no fear of Iraq. The U.S.'s "fear" is a disguise to show its might to the world and to gain more EASY OIL and to prepare for even more conquests. These are what the CABAL is after and they intend to stop at nothing to get it.

It amazes me how easily fear can be instilled in the people of the most powerful nation on earth! And it saddens me even more.


>Ferderic
>
>There is absolutely nothing humorous about the remark. It is a deadly serious affair. My expression was as much a patriotic reference of honor to the people who died protecting our Congressional Buildings on 9/11 when they attacked the hijackers of their aircraft; as it was a reflection of relief that we have finally stopped endless discussions of our national security through an impotent organization; and relief that we are finally taking action.
>
>Frederic, you and I have no quarrel at this moment. I tell with sincerity, given the recent history of your country's leader, that this subject is a very raw nerve insofar as France is concerned. It is best that neither of us say anything more on this subject in this forum.
>
>Regards
>Donald Lowrey
>United States of America