Matzi

That was meant to be irony... But regarding your summary: Well done (this time: no irony) Especially Germany is thankful...

There is probably something missing...

maybe a bit too radical... but we will come to that soon when it is going on as some people here (and everywhere else) would like to have it...

1. Ok, maybe not millions, but there will victims. Victims that could be avoided by a peaceful solution. Consider you were in that situation. 2. We certainly have. But it's a matter of means. I think that every victim is a victim too much. So there have to be other possibilities and they have to be considered at least in a situation in which this is still possible. When Saddam has launched missiles against whomever then you certainly can forget about that... Btw:Germany will help NATO partner Turkey in case of an attack. Claiming the opposite is just a sign of misinformation and prejudice.. Btw II: In such situations it a matter of looking at the present and the future and not at the past since we will never find a solution this way.

This thinking is exactly the problem in this whole issue. Sure, yeah, and every country not willing to get involved into this whole damn war thing does actually tolerate justice? Besides, how do you define justice? Presently, I have got the impression Americans think it is just to kill millions of people in order to kill one person who might constitute a threat that the US are not able to cope with. This is - as I see it - a perfect example for injustice. Is it so hard to accept an objective definition instead of a subjective one?

That would be probably the best solution, though I think the result wouldn't be that great...

Not if they do not agree in an issue.

So, who thinks that they would feel better if they were attacked and killed?

I've already tried that...doesn't work unfortunately. I am not allowed to delete my post even though I am logged in...

*arg* Can anyone delete my last post post, please?

These are two different thinks: 1. What we think about the US as country is, well mostly, admiration. Bigger, better etc. I think that accounts for everything. 2.What we think about Americans is quite different. There are actually good and bad character traits we see. One of the former is your hospitality. And actually of the bad things there are many: (These might be quite apparent at the moment) polluting environment, feeling most powerful, feeling involved in everything that happens on earth (only politically of course) and stuff like that. It's really hard to define...

Yeah, sure, Saddam would have already nuked us if the planes had not been there...

No, it certainly is not. But, ask yourself, what are your planes doing over there? If they were not there they wouldn't be shot at, thus there were no "attack" (your way of defining this).

Yeah, sure, we have plenty of these ignorant guys, too. However, what you mentioned, we do not think that all (or some in order to exclude some persons) Americans are stupid. Instead it's something different what some Germans (maybe even many especialy in these days) think about Americans. It's really hard to define what I mean by this.

Really, well said. That's exactly the way I see this whole.

Either no one has them or everyone. That are the only possibilities. I'd prefer the first one...

Stuff like that happens in 12 years... Seen in the fanatic demonstrations against the US politics by them.... By the way, your country does certainly as well has weapons predicted to be in possession of Iraq. Thus you are - according to your own politics - a threat. So imagine, would you mention every single weapon in such a report? Would you allow others to search your whole country?

What are you talking about? What did Hitler do? First he invaded Poland, then headed for the rest of Europe. Afterwards your country got involved and that wasn't wrong at all - rather the opposite. However, the situation today is quite different. Whom did the Iraq attack? So why start a war? Because he might have weapons? Then you have to arrest millions of your citizens because they have weapons and might use them to kill somebody if they want - like Saddam. So, isn't this quite paradoxical? I think controlling is something totally different and might achieve the same result -- with fewer (innocent) people involved and killed.

Isn't this something for the education forum?

So, did your government publish every single information which was - legally in my eyes - longed for by some other state or your own people. Kennedy assassination. When did some of the most important information get published (when existent any more)? It is absolute nonsense to let a second Vietnam happen. Your government had many people killed in order to fight against communism (by the way: unsuccessfully). However, did this justify an attack? No. Does the fact that Iraq might have ABC weapons justify an attack on the people of Iraq? No at all. By the way, what does Iraq interest you? They are just that far away from your country? Why not letting them live like they want to?

One former emperor tried this and isolated two children. They both died (I've already mentioned this somewhere else, I think).

Great game: Who nukes whom first... Legitimate? Not at all.

It looks great, really. In my eyes it's just art.

I totally agree with both of you. A clone is not different from a child you (or someone else) have to rise and that can be influenced greatly by every single event.