Sound arguments regarding oil have been posted time and time again. Do we really need to rehash every point for every new discussion thread? You don't buy it and you feel anybody that uses it has lost credibility. Fine. That doesn't mean it's not true.
I haven't seen credible evidence that Iraq has much in the way of a _current_ WMD program. That also doesn't mean it's not true. But I prefer to err on the side of not slaughtering people without more than the sketchy evidence we've been shown so far. Powell's presentation was compelling, but much of it was outdated intel. I'm not saying wait for the "smoking gun". Just show me a new gun with a round in the chamber and fingerprints on it and I'll get out of the way. -Kevin > -----Original Message----- > From: Kevin Schmidt [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > Sent: Tuesday, February 18, 2003 7:51 AM > To: CF-Community > Subject: The Choice Before Us > > > //snip > not to be inflamitory, but surely any argument that applies to the Iraq > situation apart from oil applies more to South Korea? > //snip > > Was that not the biggest dodge I have ever seen. If you say the > oil argument holds water, prove it. I haven't seen any valid > arguments that prove oil is the reason for war. > ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~| Archives: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/index.cfm?forumid=5 Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/index.cfm?method=subscribe&forumid=5 Signup for the Fusion Authority news alert and keep up with the latest news in ColdFusion and related topics. http://www.fusionauthority.com/signup.cfm Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=89.70.5
