I'm going to keep this simple as I don't visit this forum enough to get into a feint-riposte with others who will disagree. There are valid points of view on both sides, but ultimately I have trouble with those who oppose the war.

1) Isn't Saddam Hussein a dramatically evil dictator with an unlimited budget?

2) Hasn't he demonstrably killed citizens of his own country with poison gas distributed by his own warplanes?

3) Has he not started more than one war with huge loss of life to his own people as well as those whom he invaded?

Those statements of course are simply stated and somewhat simple minded. But what's wrong with that?

I tend to follow the Thomas Friedman column in the New York Times. He had a good pro'n con on the issue which I won't copy into this space but is worth reading.

I don't think Britain and the U.S. are imperialist here. But that opens up a big can of worms over the definition of imperialism. Were we imperialist when we took over Japan for 7-8 years at the end of WWII and re-made their government? It was the right thing to do, and we're all better off for it.

I'm not a big 'W' fan. I'm full of personal misgivings. But he's the only president we've got (since the one we elected lost in the Supreme Court!)

The war will be the easy part.