?However, I think it's also a dangerous delusion to believe that the Iraqis will give up once they see how strong your resolve is.?

I agree. That?s why you may as well plan on annihilating the terrorists there. I don?t know anyone who is suggesting we bluff them.

?We were all told that Saddam Hussein had Weapons of Mass Destruction (Always Capitalised). Oops, sorry, no he didn't. Our bad. But he was in league with Al Qaeda. Well, oops again. Sorry, no he wasn't. Our bad.?

He DID have WMD (unless the UN was lying as well.) And while he was not in league with Al-Queda his security agents had contacts with them. While that might have been the immediate reason for war, the primary reason was to remove an enemy of the United States from power. As some would say: ?Mission accomplished.? <img src="/images/graemlins/laugh.gif" alt="" />

As far as the prison thing goes, I find it odd that you feel sorrier for the abusers than the prisoners they abused. In my opinion, the abusers and the prisoners were all equally scum.

Regards, VInce

"I agree. That?s why you may as well plan on annihilating the terrorists there."

It would be so nice if the terrorists would just co-operate - gather themselves into one spot and hold up signs saying "I am a terrorist - shoot me!" But somehow, I don't think it's gonna happen. Which is why I find your notion of annihilating them all so charmingly naive. <img src="/images/graemlins/wink.gif" alt="" />

You're assuming that the number of terrorists is finite and non-regenerating.

"He DID have WMD (unless the UN was lying as well.)"

Interesting, then, how they all seem to have vanished into thin air.

"While that might have been the immediate reason for war, the primary reason was to remove an enemy of the United States from power."

That wasn't the reason Bush gave to the American people.

"As some would say: ?Mission accomplished.? "

As some others would say: "Oops. This puddle was a whole lot deeper than it looked when we stepped into it."

"As far as the prison thing goes, I find it odd that you feel sorrier for the abusers than the prisoners they abused. In my opinion, the abusers and the prisoners were all equally scum. "

I find it odd that most of these "scum" had no criminal records or history of violence, and yet by some amazing cosmic coincidence they all ended up in the same unit.

For a more plausible explanation of what happened - and why I believe those "scum" were victims of their own leaders - check out these web sites on the Stanford Prison Experiment:

"The Stanford Prison Experiment was a landmark psychological study of the human response to captivity, in particular, to the real world circumstances of prison life. It was conducted in 1971 by a team of researchers led by Philip Zimbardo of Stanford University. Volunteers played the roles of guard and prisoner, and lived in a mock prison. However, the experiment quickly got out of hand, and was ended early."

http://encyclopedia.thefreedictionary.com/Stanford%20Prison%20Experiment

http://www.prisonexp.org/links.htm

http://sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2004/05/08/MNGN76IG761.DTL

For one critical of the comparison (which I personally didn't find all that convincing), see:

http://slate.msn.com/id/2100419/

The old saying goes "Kill 'em all, let God sort 'em out" and add to that "and tell the whiners to get in line." Mind you, I'm just quoting a t-shirt/bumper sticker from the 60's

"Which is why I find your notion of annihilating them all so charmingly naive. "

I never thought we'd get them all--I'm saying we need to get all we can. Looks like we've bagged quite a few so far. Let's keep up the good work.

"Interesting, then, how they all (WMD) seem to have vanished into thin air."

Now who's being naive? Maybe you think Saddam dismantled them all? I like your "thin air" theory better!

"I find it odd that most of these "scum" had no criminal records or history of violence, and yet by some amazing cosmic coincidence they all ended up in the same unit."

So what was it then, another conspiracy? I doubt it. I think it's more likely they ended up there because they were the LEAST qualified to go into combat. Maybe they were not the sharpest tools in the shed. But someone has to do the guarding. What is the alternative? Should we just let all the terrorists and Baathist thugs loose because we don't have any trained prison guards there?

This is war. Bad things happen sometimes. On a scale of one to ten the prison fiasco was about a 3. We learn from it and move on.

Regards, Vince

I'm gonna just bow out of this discussion before Chris is forced to add another locked thread to my list <img src="/images/graemlins/smirk.gif" alt="" />

I'll bow out too. The debate has been fun though.

Regards, Vince