Thank you Fuzzy for your response. But I would like just to correct one thing. I don't know how I have been put in a position of supporting Saddam Hussein. If you look back in my post you will see that I called him a monster. I have also worked with torture victims from Iraq (I am an art psychotherapist and also have an understanding of projection, splitting and scapegoating). And as you say, in politics things are never black and white, although it can be easier to think in those terms.

I also read some of Rocky's posts before he died, so I knew him a little bit, and I was shocked when he died so I can only imagine the impact on people who had been close to him.

Hev

"I'm trying to maintain a shred of dignity in this world." - Me

Thank you Fuzzy for your response. But I would like just to correct one thing. I don't know how I have been put in a position of supporting Saddam Hussein. If you look back in my post you will see that I called him a monster. I have also worked with torture victims from Iraq (I am an art psychotherapist and also have an understanding of projection, splitting and scapegoating). And as you say, in politics things are never black and white, although it can be easier to think in those terms.

I also read some of Rocky's posts before he died, so I knew him a little bit, and I was shocked when he died so I can only imagine the impact on people who had been close to him.

Hev

You called Saddam a monster only after you said, "I believe that Bush and Blair are more a threat to the security of the world then Saddam ever was." After such a statment, and in light of your claim that Saddam is a monster, how dare you complain that I "descend to a personal level of insult" in my posts! Your memory seems rather selective, like the basis of your political views.

[Edit]: Now I see that Fuzzy has already answered you in the time it took me to compose my answer, so nevermind,

You sound very angry

You sound very angry

Not particularly.

You sound very irrational--but no matter how angy I get, I always calm down in time.

You sound very angry

"I'm trying to maintain a shred of dignity in this world." - Me

You sound very angry

No, he's not angry! Tom is actually a very nice person, but his discussion style can seem very intimidating. I was almost scared to death the first time I debated with him, but I found out later that he has a very stringent sense of logic and it can make him sound like that!

But he has his political oppinions, and these can maybe make him look agressive to his political opponents.

But I admire his logic and ability to keep a clear head in a discussion.

You sound very angry

No, he's not angry! Tom is actually a very nice person, but his discussion style can seem very intimidating. I was almost scared to death the first time I debated with him, but I found out later that he has a very stringent sense of logic and it can make him sound like that!

But he has his political oppinions, and these can maybe make him look agressive to his political opponents.

But I admire his logic and ability to keep a clear head in a discussion.

Hi Fuzzy,
I think that Hev is just trying to shift this discussion to my mental state, which is apparently one of her "adverserial techniques". It's clear she has very strong feelings about the war and about Bush and Blair, but that seems to be where it ends, since she has not backed up her claims about, for example, the war being illegal, etc. Thus, she goes to a tactic of questioning my emotional state. It doesn't bother me.

"I'm trying to maintain a shred of dignity in this world." - Me

And then answer the original question, i.e.,why can't they be incarcerated within the United States? What is there to hide?

The problem with the fight against terrorism is not the war in Iraq, but that we do too little. As it stands today, United States is doing a lot with a very few allies. Most of the rest of the world is doing the Ostrich maneuver and tries not to look, or, even worse, makes the situation worse by saying and doing things that only encourage the terrorists. We could've done so much more if we actively supported America's lonely and resolute fight. This war on terrorism will continue for decades and hurt most of the countries in the world, either they want to get involved or not. Is it right to let America fight for all of us? I think not!

But she won't succeed on that!!!! I remember the last one who tried that! LOLLL!!! And Rocky started to question his emotional state!!! That was priceless!!! My God, Rocky was great when he got started! LOLLLL!!! :-D

Quite true, but IMHO Iraq was a mistake. Fact, Saddam was a bastard, but didn't threaten us directly, he just made life a misery for his own people and kept the Iranians off balance. Now Iraq has turned into the biggest terrorist training camp imaginable. The Islamic terrorists have no problem recruiting thousands of jihadists, training them, and now giving them hands on experience in Iraq.

We should have been in eastern Pakistan where the vipers have nested with impunity. I have no problem with us destroying the Taliban and Al-Queda in Afganistan. But Iraq has created a larger problem than it could ever solve. The future doesn't look very bright in any case. In the end it may turn out to be one of the biggest religious wars in our (being humans) civilizations history. Currently political correctness prevents us from looking at it from that stand point.

Now Iraq has turned into the biggest terrorist training camp imaginable.

I think Hev should be introduced to a guy we know in Alaska. Can you imagine the sparks that would fly when they each realized neither one knew what the other was talking about? Sounds very romantic to me.

"I'm trying to maintain a shred of dignity in this world." - Me

Hi Fuzzy,
I think that Hev is just trying to shift this discussion to my mental state, which is apparently one of her "adverserial techniques". It's clear she has very strong feelings about the war and about Bush and Blair, but that seems to be where it ends, since she has not backed up her claims about, for example, the war being illegal, etc. Thus, she goes to a tactic of questioning my emotional state. It doesn't bother me.

Saddam did not let UN inspectors do what he agreed to after he was beaten back from his conquest of Kuwait. Your argument actually supports my position, since failing to find WMD, because Saddam refused to allow inspections, is a key justification for the war.

For all you say, I am much happier with Bush as my president than the many Iraqis killed and tortured by Iraqi thugs ever were under Saddam. I don't think Bush's ideas are nearly as stupid as you are for making such a statement, but in any case I prefer stupid ideas to murderous acts.

The whole idea of the no-fly zones was to try and protect Kurds in the North and Shiites in the South of Iraq, so don't say the U.S. doesn't care about any but U.S. citizens. America has a long, proud tradition of giving aid to countries around the world, in much greater numbers than your country.

First, there was no Taliban when the U.S. supported Bin Laden, it came into existance only after the Soviet puppet regime was ousted. As for Saddam's treatment of his citizens while we supported him, U.S. diplomatic pressure was exerted, but at that time (dictator or not) his government was legitimate and he was under no treaty obligation to comply (like the cease-fire treaty that you seem to ingore).

Did you read the statement? It cites a former chief weapons inspector of the U.N. who said, "The fundamental problem with Iraq remains the nature of the regime, itself. Saddam Hussein is a homicidal dictator who is addicted to weapons of mass destruction."

You say that you hope the U.S. chooses a leader who puts human rights on the agenda, but you oppose the war in Iraq which does just that! That is just too irrational for me to comprehend, and I have wasted most of my lunch hour answering you, even though it is likely you will not understand a thing I have said.

I think Hev should be introduced to a guy we know in Alaska. Can you imagine the sparks that would fly when they each realized neither one knew what the other was talking about? Sounds very romantic to me.