>>Are you telling me that only U.S.A. and U.K holds the truth?
>
>No, but in this case, I am pretty sure France doesn't have it.

I don't know how you came to that conclusion. You must be connected with very high strong sources.

>>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?
>
>Do you really believe that the nuclear reactor in Iraq was for energy needs?

Do you really think that it is a good thing to react on things that we believe instead of facts?

>Perhaps French TV has been misleading you. Here is what the head of Saddam's nuclear program had to say:
>
>http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/shows/unscom/interviews/hamza.html

Ok that makes sense. But does this mean that U.S.A. and U.K will declare war to all the other countries that have (or want to have) nuclear reactors? Facts indicate that Irak's use of its nuclear reactor was for evil purposes. How will the U.S.A. and U.K. be sure that it's not the case for other countries. So just to be safe (better be safe than sorry) they'll declare war to every one of those countries? When do you start and when do you stop? In that case perhaps it's luck that led to know about the Iraq's hidden agenda.

>>There's a place called U.N. Have you heard about it?
>
>Yes. They are great at passing resolutions. Over 17 of which Saddam has ignored. Saddam has been in power for over 20 years now, torturing Iraqi citizens. Here is a report from Amnesty International:
>
>http://web.amnesty.org/library/Index/engMDE140102001?OpenDocument&of=COUNTRIES%5CIRAQ?OpenDocument&of=COUNTRIES%5CIRAQ
>
>Some others:
>
>http://www.cnn.com/2003/WORLD/meast/04/09/sprj.irq.secret.jail.ap/index.html
>http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,83619,00.html
>
>Can you tell me what the U.N. has done in the last 20 years to end this?
>
>>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.
>
>We have waited over 20 years. I think that is quite long enough.

Who is we? SO far WE does'nt seem to be many major countries. For me the fact that U.N. rejected the idea of a war it's enough.