' "Do 19 prohibited but non-WMD shells justify all the killing and mutilation on both sides? "

NO, but how about the ttens of thousands in the mass graves, or the risk poesed by the other WMD and prohibited weapons that Saddam would not account for?"

Well, that was a bit overstated, if you take it literally. What I meant was, 'Do you think that possession of ineffective though prohibited weapons, (or the assumed but not proven possession of effective weapons) is grounds for a declaration of pre-emptive war?' You hadn't brought up the 'ttens of thousands in the mass graves,' but I'll include that in the question. Do you think we should declare war on every nation where there are 'tens of thousands in the mass graves'? Like the USSR; should we have declared war on them?

'I think your question is not fair-.Does your right to drink justify the 30,000 plus killed in achohol related accidents each year? Answer me that.'

No, but we've seen that Prohibition is worse.

And I think your question has no bearing on the subject. Does your right to drive justify the 30,000 plus killed in automobile related accidents each year? Answer me that. Does your right to go out in winter weather without warm clothing justify the 30,000 plus killed by respiratory diseases each year? Answer me that.

Absense of proof is not proof of absence, but it's even less proof of existence.

And getting back to my bottom line; if you think this is a just war why aren't you and/or your children over there helping fight it?

clint