WOM..
Yes a couple of thousand...some F18s, some ships and some surveylance [tracking] aircraft, etc....the SAS probably number about 200...[but we'll never really know]..

it´s a sad situation, but there is probably a reason why this man wanted to attack American soldiers. you would probably have similar things in mind when a foreign country starts bombing the US

WOM, I saw that PBS show too. It was fascinating.

I find it so ironic that the very people who are making such a fuss about anti-American sentiments are retaliating with even stronger anti-non-American ones. There's so much arrogance and blind patriotism flying around here. Yet again I've found myself skipping several pages because I got sick of reading comments bashing those who disagree with agressive action.

There's a very distinct difference between killing to protect your loved ones from a real threat, and killing innocents in the name of preventing a potential threat. In the end, it's not US soil that's under any major threat from Saddam, and yet they continue to preach about how they're going to war to protect their own people. Why can't these people just be honest and say that they are attacking Iraq because they disagree with the atrocities which are claimed to have been brought upon the Iraqi people by Saddam Hussein and his government? Why does it always have to be about protecting Americans and God bless American and yada yada yada...?

I'm proud that I'm not American. Not because I have any problems with the American people, but because I'd be ashamed to have these views expressed in my name.

The two main instigators of war are religion and patriotism, and I'm glad that I hold neither. While nations continue to distinguish themselves with boasts of superiority in whatever capacity, and with comparisons of moral standards, there will never be a chance for peace. Only once we start to consider ourselves as people of one global community, and learn to respect the ways and opinions of other nations without resorting to agression and underhanded comments about mistakes of the past can be hope to gain any semblance of peace.

Several people in particular have made me very angry in this thread. Not because I would deny them their opinions on the matter at hand, but because they feel the need to attack other nations to prove the worth of their own.

The only people I have really come to respect in the course of this discussion are paxx and the others who are not afraid to disagree without dredging up nasty little facts from the past which have no relevance to the topic.

Grayhaze: It is natural that those you agree with your views are people you would tend to admire more while those who disagree with you anger you.

But it's intellectually dishonest to assert or imply that one side is somehow arguing at a responsible level while the other side is in the mud.

I mean heck, good grief, you had Paxx implying that the only reason why Americans are in favor of action is that we're brainwashed.

And you above imply that Americans are in favor of military action because we're blind with patriotism.

That seems to be a trend with some people here, yourself and Paxx included. Those who disagree with you are simply not as "enlightened" as you are it seems. It doesn't seem to have occurred to you that some of us, having looked at the facts at length have simply come to a different conclusion than you have.

I am very glad to be an American. I support the foreign policy of the US administration. It has nothing to do with blind patriotism. It has to do with a sober assessment of the facts and making a judgement call.

I have simply come to a different conclusion than you have.

Similarly, when one says that we should be "ashamed" of the position of our country, I would say that is nation bashing. But again, you seem to have a real blind spot for those who attack the United States (consider some of the things our friend from Spain has been saying, look what you and Paxx have said). I fully admit to "Bashing" France. But there is nothing that I stated about France that isn't factually true. Someone from France or sympathetic to France might find what I've written to be upsetting. On the other hand, a Jewish person would likely find Paxx's equating the holocaust with the French experience during WOrld War II to be very upsetting.

I do agree that it's wrong for someone to imply Paxx is a coward because he is pacifistic. I certainly don't think Paxx is a coward. Moreover, my opinion of Paxx, you, Thibaud and others has not been harmed at all by this discussion. We should all take a step back and be thankful that we can have these relatively friendly exchanges of ideas.

I would ask that people try to avoid making *personal* remarks. Attack the message, not the messenger.

The extent of my 'patriotism' is to be pissed off with those at ArtUproar who persist in referring to themselves as 'AUssies'.
We may be a bunch of larrikins and 'good sports' but we have graves on any continent you'd like to point a stick at with the dead from just about every global/local conflict you can think of...who fought [and died] for all sorts of reasons, one of them being 'to be and remain Australian'...that's what an 'Aussie' is, not some smart-alek bunch of kids on a web-site. The sooner they move on from doing that, the sooner I'll see them respecting others' National pride.

Yes, I'm proud to be an Aussie...but we don't need to wave a flag or sing an anthem...all we need is to look around at the rest of us...we may be all different generations of wogs, but we're all true-blue and fair-dinkum, now...

I dunno why people talk out of their asses...

the original great-granddaddy of the internet was called the ARPAnet.

ARPA:

"ARPA - DoD directive 5105.15 establishing the Advanced Research Projects Agency (ARPA) was signed on February 7, 1958."

ARPA later became:

"DARPA - On March 23, 1972, by DoD Directive, the name was changed to the Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency (DARPA). DARPA was established as a separate defense agency under the Office of the Secretary of Defense"

The people who say the internet doesn't owe its existence to the military are dolts.


******************

It is time to lean back and tell yourselves what a beloved professor told me about racism once.

"It wasn't reasoned *into* people, so it can't be reasoned out of them".

The anti-war sentiment in this case is a hippies, look-at-me-I'm-enlightened, Devart socialite, "if we don't look at it maybe it will go away" stance. It disregards 3 decades of crimes against humanity by Saddam Hussein. The Iraqi people are hostages, and many would simply allow the hostage-taker to do with them what they will, for fear that aiding them might risk their already threatened and miserable lives, or sacrifice some useless ideal.

I feel that the anti-war stance is racist and inhumane; It happened in Rwanda, it happened all over Eastern Europe, and in every case ethnic, non-christians were the main victim.
If a French or German leader gassed and starved his people he wouldn't last a year, and with little protest at his demise. I have no urge to argue with people who can write off the suffering and deaths of millions of people simply to *appear* more evolved or idealistic.

The middle east is filled with brutal, chaotic dictatorships that have no regard for human rights or freedom. I will be happy to see them *all* fall, one at a time or en' masse, peacefully, or forcibly. The world *will* evolve, no matter how many has-been nations think they can continue to profit from petty, evil men. Those who oppose that evolution will be remembered as those who opposed the liberation of billions of people.

'nuff said