XPost: rec.arts.sf.tv, rec.arts.tv   
   From: hcharper@goldenvalleycable.com   
      
   David V. Loewe, Jr wrote:   
   > Which shows you have trouble staying on point (or making connections   
   > from previously posted material).   
      
   That's something nobody seems to be able to do here, myself included ;-)   
      
   I responded to the claim that there was absolutely no reason to invade   
   Iraq in 2003, saying oil was a good reason, which Cheney/Halliburton   
   didn't forget. Now this has digressed into a debate about subsidiaries   
   and nationalities, with nothing on reasons or lack thereof to invade   
   Iraq in 2003. Sheesh!   
      
   Oil was a reason, genocide going on was a good reason, constant warring   
   in the region as well as attacks on USA allies was a reason too. All,   
   but the oil in my opinion, were valid reasons to invade and remove a   
   known despot.   
      
   What I object to in the whole matter is the fact that propaganda (WMD)   
   and fear tactics were used to pacify objections to the invasion. A   
   government of the people, by the people, and for the people, should   
   TRUST it's own people, IMHO.   
      
   If the people don't want to fight a war, then it should not be fought. A   
   perfect example is W.W.II. The people were tire of war from W.W.I and   
   did not want to stop Germany again. So we stayed out of it until   
   Germany's ally Japan struck Pearl Harbor, then the people lined up   
   around the block to join the military, and defeated an entrenched Axis   
   power in short order considering how well the enemy was doing. We got   
   lucky? I think it was the determination and support of the allied forces   
   PEOPLE. That is, they had a good REASON to motivate them. ;-)   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)