Well, the title of the thread is "Another Bush War" so it does stand to reason that Bush might find himself on the main stage of this thread.

I don't think is off limits to question:

1. The links between the Bin Laden and Bush families.

2. Bush's military record.

3. The fact that Iraq recives $6B from the US for it's oil.

4. That Bush and Cheney are oil men and continue to have close ties to the industry.

5. That it can be forcefilly argued that an attack on Iraq increases the chance of one day having a family member of a killed Iraqi float a boat with a nuclear device up the Potomac River.

6. That those corporations which will porfit the most from a hot war in Iraq are arms manufacturers which have close ties to the party the now possesses the White House.

7. That, as a result of a hot war in Iraq, the federal budget will continue to tilt further toward the "defense" department and further away from social programs.

8. That perhaps the dialogue on the internet has brought about some reconsiderations for a war on Iraq.

9. That a war on Saddam need not be a war on Iraq,

and 10. That perhaps rather than attacking Iraq, Bush could call for a Middle East Peace Summit, including members of the PLO, with the aim of furthering the basic elements of the Saudi proposals.

Okay, now 'ol Bobert has put up enough stuff to keep a few folks busy firing back, but, hey, we might have strayed off course and and the "new and improved" Bobert has not once used the following words: Junior, Senior, Bin Laden or knucklehead.

And I've followed Doug's advice with the paragraph thing (kind of...).

Peace

Or no war...

Bobert