I got a good chuckle out of this one John! :o) Vegas is sounding better by the day...except that if I had to learn a living on 'hunches' I would definitely fail! Oh well, so much for that idea. :o)

To be honest, living here in the U.S. I would like nothing better than for no evidence of WMD to EVER be found (granted it may take time to determine if there is in fact any evidence), and for no evidence of any terrorist training camps or monetary support for terrorists to be found in Iraq, and for the U.S. administration to have egg on its face for conducting an unjustified war. That would mean that there is no clear threat to the security of the U.S. and Iraq should have been left to change their regime in their own time by their own means. However, if all of that is true, then it also means that many innocent civilians died for no reason at all by tragic horrific means on behalf of the U.S. government and Britain and Australia (although many would argue that even if war were justified, there can never be any justification for civilian casualties - I sympathise with that - or that there is never any reason for war whatsoever).

As facts change, political opinions will (and should) change. Regardless of which way the facts lead. On another front, it looks like the Iraqis want an Islamic state for their future (hard to tell until elections are held down the road if it is the wish of the many or just a few) and that is their right. I firmly believe that the Iraqi people should choose their own constitution and their own government with the support and guidance (if wanted) from the UN. Many disagree with me very strongly, but that is my personal opinion. Of course, new facts could always change my opinion and I hope that that is always the case. I would hate to become stuck into one position and one viewpoint simply by virtue of being stubborn! :o) Afterall, I have been wrong before...


>Tracy
>
>I feel I am being shoehorned into a position here ;-)
>
>My position: based on the facts available to us, there is no reason apart from propoganda and feelings provided to us from Fox, to insist that SH had WMD. People can "believe" he had WMD if they wish, but this is not based on evidence available to us.
>
>Opinions re "why SH didn't use WMD" are academic until WMD are found.
>
>Once WMD are found, the facts available to us are changed and the opinions based on those facts, should change. This change is not a sign of stupidity or "being wrong".
>
>Some people (not you) have retained the same opinion all along, independent of the facts. These people hope that their beliefs will turn out true so they can triumphantly say "see, told you so!" as if they are right and we dummies were wrong for relying on facts rather than hunches and beliefs.
>
>I suppose we could all move to Vegas and earn a massive living based on hunches and beliefs, a suggestion with just as much logical merit as the above.
>
>Regards
>
>JR