troll, old pal, your ego and mine are attracted to each other just like two moths trying to hog a single nightlight. Everything you say about me, I can say about you, and vice versa, and what a joy it is! Ha! Ha!

Let me quote your last paragraph:

Well, Little Hawk, if it's in a book I'm sure it must be true. And if "so much has changed" since 1991, I guess we can throw out all those ancient documents like The Magna Carta, and The US Bill of Rights, and The Tem Commandments.
But then, by that logic, we could also throw out the UN Charter. I mean, a LOT has changed in the world since 1945.
Go back to your book. Your whole line of reasoning is illogical and based mainly on how you wish things were instead of on how they are.

If what is in a book? Hang on...gotta consult the above sections...

Oh, I see...the personal stuff about G.W.'s love for his father? Well, it seems fairly plausible to me, troll, and it does not reflect badly on G.W. that he loves and is loyal to his father. I think you ought to try reading the book. It's by two Texas journalists who have personally known George Bush Jr. and Karl Rove for decades, and they certainly don't paint Bush as some kind of evil guy. Why should I not give serious consideration to what they say?

Just read the friggin' book, and then make up your own mind. It's called "Bush's Brain - How Karl Rove Made George Bush Presidential".

Now what are you suggesting? That:

1. No previous authoritative statement or rule is EVER to be changed?

At no time did I suggest "throwing out" the U.N. Charter, or the Ten Commandments, or anything else. I suggested modifying existing agreements, and building upon them to form new agreements to meet changing conditions. And that is exactly what France, Russia, Germany, and China were suggesting in saying that it was not time to fight yet, but time to continue inspections and disarmament of Iraq (which was already being done in stages). That is what the majority of the World is saying.

Bush doesn't want to wait. Waiting is too difficult (for the impatient or the greedy or those who desire a war regardless of the circumstance), and it costs money to maintain troops in the desert. So why not just drop a few thousand bombs right now, kill a few thousand people, and take by force what could be achieved without force anyway?

Now, troll, apply this last statement to yourself:

Your whole line of reasoning is illogical and based mainly on how you wish things were instead of on how they are.

Exactly. So is yours. We both make no sense whatsoever from the other guy's point of view (despite the fact that we both have strong abilities in using logic), because we have differing underlying ideas about who in this world is being truthful and who is not. And we both base our line of reasoning on how we wish things were instead of how they are. EVERYBODY does that. That's how people change their world (and themselves) and progress toward better things, by focusing on the way they wish things were (rather than how they temporarily are), and working toward it bit by bit as best they can.

I can see my own subjectivity AND yours. How come you can only see mine?

DING! (your turn) (*grin)

- LH