Vile wrote:

Acidus, you are idealistic and consumed by conspiracy theories. Has it ever occurred to you that an international action can have multiple benefits? Iraq is better off without Hussein. They are better off as a democracy and cheaper gasoline sounds like a great tradeoff. After all, we spent a few hundred billion dollars on the war effort. We could have approached this peaceably with places such as the EU or Australia, but when a hostile rogue nation cannot come to the table in a civilized manner, they do not deserve to exist on this planet in that form. They need a new mouthpiece, as it were. When we are done, the world will be a better place. These changes are inevitable. You need to see things from more than one limited perspective.

Vile, this is the best arguement I have ever seen you make! In fact, I agree with most of your points. It is extremely difficult to have a successful UN-like body when not everyone plays by the rules. Having people like Saddam certain makes things much hard to deal with, and sometimes it makes sense to take your marbles and go home. I don't deny Iraq/the World is better without Saddam in power. I believe it will be very difficult to meet our energy demands. I can understand (but not condone) America invading to protect vital national intersts

What pisses me off is the continued denials of the Bush administration about the reasons for war. Don't piss on my face and tell me its raining. Don't feed me bullshit about UN violations or "bringing democracy" when we ignore Israel and Saudi Arabia. After 1700+ dead Americans and $200+ billion, the president needs to come clean.

RE: CNOOC: Unocal Bid Not About Politics - Yahoo! News