I believe I've just been checkmated. You're good.

Tracy, you seem to be informed particularily well on military conflicts. Is it something that you have a interest in?

>Doctoring official reports is not corruption? I see a clear parallel between Iraq and Lesotho.
>
>http://www.frontpagemag.com/Articles/ReadArticle.asp?ID=9886
>http://www.libertysoft.com/liberty/features/72peron.html
>http://www.wsws.org/news/1998/sep1998/saf-s24.shtml
>
>It appears to me that there was one report written and another one released. Also, while the government may have requested intervention, was SA supporting a corrupt regime? One has to wonder when the majority of the populace (not a small minority force) believed the election results were fudged and the original report stated as high as 98% and the people were calling for new elections and the resignation of the current regime. They were clearly overpowered by the South African troops otherwise I think the results would be different. It appears that fear over stability of the area overrode the will of the people to me. There have been many such actions by the American Government in the past (not always supported by American People) with questionable motives and questionable as to 'right' and 'wrong.' The same holds true for Britian. My original point was not whether the invasion was the right move or not but the questions on whether or not the report was fudged before it was
>released. There appear to be clear indications that it was. Also the reasons for the invasion are as questionable as previous U.S. invasions. In my opinion, regardless of whether it was right move or not for the people of Lesotho, it is still the pot calling the kettle black.