Be nice, guys. We are all entitled to different opinions (at least so far in this country) and we don't need to call each other names because of it.

Yes, Old Guy, I think most of the world is opposed to war, especially when it happens in their front yard. After all, what would you rather do, have a peaceful quiet life, or have your town and family blown up, shot, etc.? We are spoiled here, compared to some populations--we haven't had an actual big nasty war on our own soil since 1865. Sept. 11 took us all by surprise partly because we thought we were invulnerable.

It's obvious Saddam doesn't give a flying you-know-what for his people. He's a gangster who managed to take power by force and intimidation. It's also pretty clear that George Bush the First didn't care about them either. Leaflets were dropped encouraging the opposition to rise up at the end of the Gulf War, promising American support. They did, and if they'd had a little of that promised support, Saddam would be history now. But the Bush administration decided not to support them after all, and thousands were killed. 800,000 left the country. (I have given up trying to do links after my rousing lack of success, but the story was in the San Francisco Chronicle on Feb. 16.) Schwartzkopf had a clear road to Bagdad and could have finished the job then. So how come they didn't do it? Whatever the reason for that decision, you can bet it wasn't for the good of anybody but George Bush.

Saddam is probably just as much of a psycho as Hitler, and probably just as dangerous. But I still want to go after him with the agreement of the UN, not as American cowboys out to prove we can kick butt any time we want to.