I fully support the actions of our President and our military to end the dictatorial and repressive regime of Saddam Hussein. Inspections have not, and will not, work to disarm Saddam. He has played the US and the UN for fools and patsies for 12 years. It is time to return the country of Iraq to a free and unoppressed Iraqi people.

"Here's the comment you intend to make:

'Wars are horrible - the second worst evil in the history of mankind. The worst is dictatorship, the cause of wars. It's vital for the U.S. to strike Saddam Hussein without mercy and free ourselves from his threat, and not incidentally the people of Iraq.'"

Is it so wrong to spam this site with fake names, addresses, e-mails, etc. in order to gum up the whole process? I mean, I registered as Amanda Huginkiss just now. And she totally agrees with President Bartlett. Just she wont be calling anytime soon.

haha.

r.

I think that *IS* wrong. It's funny, but it's wrong. Having a pro-war statement is a fair way of using the web site. Making pro-war people look like Bart Simpson does not actually help the case.

Here's a copy of my submission to MoveOn.

As I've explained more fully on my own blog, I think it is a mistake to register anything on that site. It's like showing up at a pro-Saddamanti-war rally and yelling "down with Saddam" from the back row. All the bean counters will care about, or even notice, is that one more person showed up at the rally.

Well, I guess that certainly may be true. But only if they choose to limit the messages that they promise to share with the nation. If they do that, it show's how morally dishonest they REALLY are, and they get hammered even worse.

I signed up and left an ambiguous message. Nothing fraudulent about my involvement. After all, my ultimate goal is peace. Just not temporary peace at the price of greater tyranny in the future.

There is one more place to go, also:

https://site-essential.com/blog/20Feb03.shtml#1502

that gives directions for a positive action as well. A posting had been made previously about the site mentioned above with a suggestion:

https://site-essential.com/blog/18Feb03.shtml#1489

Do one or both; they will each have an effect.

I assume you lot dont actually read the papers, democracy is the last thing the Iraqi people ar going to get.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A37949-2003Feb20.html

"In addition to the consultative council, an Iraqi commission would be formed to reestablish a judicial system. An additional commission would write a new constitution, although officials emphasized that they would not expect to "democratize" Iraq along the lines of the U.S. governing system. Instead, they speak of a "representative Iraqi government."

Representing Esso BP and Amaco no doubt.

One final point, if the anti-war movement is so unimportant, why are you all obsessed with us?

Actually, I don't think the anti-war movement is unimportant at all. I just wonder why most anti-war arguments are nothing more than thinly veiled America bashing diatribes with no substance, but lots of bluster and blather.

Nice way to start a post, by the way - "I assume you lot don't bother to read the newspapers". Perhaps you don't read them either, if you are advocating keeping Saddam in power and the Iraqi people under his heel.

Next time maybe you could actually leave us your blog address or a real e-mail address, rather than being an anonymous troll.

As for why are we obsessed with "you" - it's because we don't want a vocal fringe minority making policy for the rest of us. If you get to yell and scream and shout, then so do we.

That is a real email address tube.

No answer to my point, just the rather strange allegation that posting from the Washington Times is an "Anti-american diatribe"

Care to explain how quoting a US paper expressing the views of US officials is anti-american?

The only thing certain about a post Saddam Iraqi government, is that the papers don't even agree on what form it'll take. There were at last count about 4 different plans reported.

"Representative" government IS what we have, the sentence you qoute contradicts itself. There isn't a pure democracy on the planet. They'll have a military governor for awhile, like Germany or Japan. Handing over their government to anyone there would'nt make any more sense than handing Berlin over to the locals the day the war ended. Don't read history much, do you?

Thanks for including a cautionary link to my blog. When I predicted last week that the counter-rally would backfire, I was privately hoping to be proved wrong. Unfortunately, if the current stories on Fox, CNN and MSNBC are any indication, I wasn't.

Reguardless of what the whining Hollywood Hippie-crits say, War IS sometimes necessary! I support the greatest president ever, George W. Bush, in his efforts, as our leader, to protect us from terrorism by removing the regime in Iraq. The people in Iraq have been held captive long enough.
Pray for our president. God bless President Bush!