Not that the meets section is really a discussion board, but I'll toss
in my 2.5 cents as well.

The (potential) war with Iraq poses a good many questions to the
American people, as well as the world-community as a whole. There are
reasons for war, there are reasons against war. The questions which seem
to be most often asked in this particular case generally follow along
the lines of "Is this going to be a just war?" and "What are the
motivations for fighting such a war?"

In 1991 when Iraq invaded the nation-state of Kuwait it was quite clear
that Hussein had commited an agressive act against a country far too
small to defend itself from a threat as large as that posed by the Iraqi
army. The international community had little choise but to act, and they
did so(eventually). The case isn't as clear cut now as it was then.
Hussien has had chemical and/or biological weapons for years, both
before and after the first Gulf War. He has them now, there's no
question about it. Do we have the right to go in and effect a regieme
change because of it? International Law is fairly clear, the sovereignty
of a nation-state should be respected unless it poses an immanent
threat. Hussein has had these weapons for years, and never once used
them on an enemy.

Iraq has violated U.N. resolutions for years; many other countries have
also violated U.N. resolutions and suffered no consequence for doing so.
Iraq has lived under the crushing weight of brutal, inhumane sanctions
for over a decade. The people of Iraq suffer and often die due to
starvation, lack of proper medical care, and even lack of potable water.
Hussien lives in the lap of luxury all the while. These sanctions were
designed to force Hussein to comply with previous resolutions, and they
have failed. We persist with them still. Do we want to go into Iraq to
free it and bring the "shining light of Democracy" to the people? No.
Our policy in the Middle East has been very clear, and we very rarely
support democracy. Saudi Arabia has a monarchy along with Kuwait, and
Jordan. Virtually no country in the Arab world has had a democatic
government in the last 50+ years and we haven't been keen to change
things. We've suspected that other states, such as Iran and Lebanon,
have been in possession of banned weapons. We've never thought of going
to war over it. In Asia North Korea has a nuclear weapon, and no qualms
about using it; we've not made any preparation for war with North Korea
and I do not believe we will. Iraq has a largely untapped reserve of
oil, which would benefit several contries, including the U.S. and
Russia. Many people think to discount this as a reason for war, but no
sane analyst can safely overlook it as a motivation. It may well be that
the Bush Administration believe it is doing the right thing, but the
case has been thus far poor and unconvincing.

This will not be a quick, clean war that will end in a matter of months
or weeks. It will likely be a very long conflict drawn out over a number
of years, and it will involve a good bit of ground fighting. The
costs(in human lives) of a ground war in Iraq will be immense for all
sides, and it will most likely be innocent civillians who are harmed in
the process. In Gulf War I the allied troops didn't have to fight the
elite of the Iraqi Army, and they likely will this time.

According to U.S. intelligence sources(the CIA and the FBI) the link
between Iraq and Al-Qaeda is highly unlikely, and many senior analysts
at both agencies have publicly questions where the Bush Administration
is getting its information from. Al-Qaeda is a radical Islamist
organisation whose goal is to establish an Islamic theocracy in the
Middle East. Saddam is a secular leader with little to gain from helping
Al-Qaeda.

I doubt there's space to go into as much detail as I'd like(and need) to
go into, so I'll end this here.

Penned by my hand on the 19th of Arios, in the year 92 MA.