[dogscoff]

There would be no need to use nuclear weapons in any conflict. The US could crush the rest of the world with conventional forces.

Oh, and that's a far more comforting thought. Seriously, I wouldn't put it past the likes of George Dubbya to use nukes, it's just a matter of whether he can get away with it and he is testing the limits of public and political tolerance now. If we let him he'll stretch further and further until he's planting mushrooms all over the damn world.

There is so much on this thread that I want to respond to that I hardly know where to start. Thankfully Askan summed up many of my beliefs in his post.

Yes, Saddam is a monster, but our governments only choose to recognise that fact when it suits them. To pretend this war is for humanitarian reasons is a delusion when the very countries advocating it are the ones who armed Saddam in the first place.

False and emotive pro-war propaganda (in particular I refer to that plagiarised thesis) and shifting justifications ("it's about stopping terrorism - oh, no one believes that. OK, it's about weapons of mass destruction - no, it's actually about 'liberating' the people of Iraq.") do nothing to convince me of our governments' humanitarian motives.

I agree, Thermodyne. Guess we know who the Americans and non-Americans are in this post.

Yes, it's quite easy, everybody's location is listed at the foot of their post.

why are we suddenly so heavily investing in alternative feul if we will soon have so much oil?

You're not. Since coming to power Bush has repeatedly crippled research and legislation for alternative fuels. I don't know the figures, but I'd be willing to bet that his high profile endorsement of alternatives the other week is nowhere near enough to repair the damage he has already done.

we had the middle east in our hands, why didn't we hold it if we were so focused on oil?

Because at that time the international community and the public would not have stood for such a blatant act of imperialism. Nowadays we have the the so-called "war on terror" to justify pretty much any action in the middle east (soon to be extended to the far East) as well as draconian legislation at home.

It seems that wars tend to spring up every ten to fifteen years, correlating to shifts in the earths geo-magnetic field.

This doesn't sound so far-fetched to me: It's a known and proven fact that the phases of the moon affect peoples' mental state (ask any psychiatric hospital employee about the working full moon shift if you don't believe me) so why not the Earth's magnetic field as well?

Oh, and finally:

If you are not a citizen of the United States, mind your own damn business.

Screw you! This is an international issue! When this war escalates anti-western hatred and terrorists start blowing up my home town, will it be my business then? When the Koreans start throwing nukes at my house because George Bush has announced that they are next on his hit-list, whose business will it be? When the UN is finally steamrolled into nothing and Georgy boy declares himself the undisputed gunslinging, nuke-juggling wild-west sheriff of the world (With Toady Tony Blair as his dutiful deputy) am I allowed to voice an opinion then?