>>Hmm how interesting that all your sources are american or from U.K. sources. I'm listening to french TV from time to time and they don't sayt the same things.
>
>That hardly surpises me. Did French TV report on their economic contracts with Iraq?
>
>http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/business/2757797.stm
>
>Or did they report on how Chirac was personally involved with helping Saddam acquire a nuclear reactor from France? Now, what exactly does a country with that much oil need a nuclear reactor for?

Are you telling me that only U.S.A. and U.K holds the truth?

Nuclear reactor: Other source of energy for other needs. Or perhaps I've been misled all that time. Do you mean that you guys (U.S.A.) have those nuclear plans only for war purposes?

>>Whatever you do and whatever you says you'll always have people to agree or disagree with you. But in then end there's one thing where I'll always disagree and it's on the usefulness of a war.
>
>And what was your plan for getting rid of Saddam, or do you think he should have stayed in power?

There's a place called U.N. Have you heard about it?

>>You really think that torture is a thing only happening in Iraq?
>
>No, but that doesn't mean it shouldn't be stopped. Is that your argument, that since it's happening other places, don't bother with it?

Yes torture should be stopped. But in the end you should'nt endure it in given countries because those are allied and take it as an argument to attack others. When you really want to eradicate some things there are always pacific ways to do it.