Thanks for the response - I will need to look at some things before responding intelligently. In the mean time I will respond half intelligently and hope you all can put up with it.

This is what I hoped would happen - getting exposed to some of the arguments I have not heard (I attend a peace church and work with all democrats who are to the left of Kerry for the most part) so I can consider them.

So, our purpose was to liberate the Iraqis? Or to deal with the imminent threat (or whatever word was used - big and present danger)? I have a hard time believing that because there was no evidence on the ground and no willingness to wait for proof, and I thought no reason not to wait - we were already in there inspecting most everything. (Again - just my take on it based on little research-trying to promote discussion not fierce argument). I am not trying to defend Kerry in this statement.

What the Israelis did in Jenin seemed to be roundly condemned by almost every country as way over the top. I would take advantage of every military defense I could too if I was in charge of Israel - but why keep settling in the palestinian territory and stoking the fires of terrorism? Jewish fundamentalism, from what I have heard and read. "God gave this land to us."

I am not advocating giving in to all terrorist demands - but some sensitivity can help you avoid some problems. You are right though, with certain Muslim fundamentalists the problems would be there anyway. Just not as bad I think.

I don't see the inherent problem with giving the chechnyans a separate Muslim state. Probably due to my own ignorance again. Sure - that might not turn them into peaceful neighbors, but some accomodation makes international relations work better. Some accomodation does not.


M22s, QS4s, M2 center, Hsu stf-1.