I have read the briefing that is outlined on the right side of that page (A Decade of Defiance and Lies), which is where those numbers were lifted from

I remember reading a poster in a barracks in Germany in 1973. It read something like: "Your enemy! The Russian soldier! He is highly motivated, has steel teeth and can bench-press 600 pounds! His T-72 was built with technology provided by aliens! He can drive here from East Germany in 14 minutes, slip into your room undetected, and cut out your liver before you are even awake!"

Well, it went something like that... but the point is that subsequent revelations showed "My Enemy" to be chronically depressed, not overly well fed, and often soused on vodka.

When I look at today's potential big Wag the Dog, I can't help but think of the major deceits by U.S. administrations (both Republican and Democrat) in wars big (Vietnam) and small (Grenada). The ever-tightening grip of the military on press coverage of conflicts doesn't give me any confidence that we will find it easy to evaluate what is going on if and when war breaks out. I mean, lots of folks still think that Patriot missiles are accurate!! Amazing how fabrications take on a life of their own.

A major irony (to me) is the amazing amount of bombast and indignation heaped upon poor old Saddam now that he is no longer our murderous poison-gas-wielding dictator.

Fundamentally, I feel like Cheney, Bush, Rumsfeld, et al are in pursuit of a war because they are feeling their oats. They are in the drivers seat, and they *can*. Short of Saddam fleeing, I'm not sure what could have happened in the way of UN inspectors' discoveries that would have derailed the administration's fixed interest in exercising their newfound, jolly power. I mean, they are redefining the word "unilateral". Invading Iraq fits in nicely, thank you.

Hmmmm, I guess I would be less suspicious of this adventure if *everyone* got to play --- if we reinstituted the draft as proposed recently (Rangel/Hollings) and with *no* exemptions -- and no sneaking your son into the Texas Air National Guard. Maybe then Iraq war flag wavers would think a little harder about the possible extended consequences of this imminent war, which I think will be prolonged but hard to predict. Oh, I suppose we can just load up the transports once we've burned down Baghdad, pull everybody back to Fort Hood and just leave the remaining Iraquis to murder each other.

Interesting to me was a recent interview that included a former US Ambassador to Iraq (Peck). His "long and short" on the looming war: "So we gain nothing and lose potentially a lot." I agree. I mean, even on a plain-and-simple, US-centric, self-interest basis, I don't think that the broader outcome of this will be good for the old U.S. of A. I don't get the sense that the administration is thinking that through. They just want to do it. Make more enemies? Bomb 'em.

It may be material for a different kind of thread, but I think much of my lack of support for this mortal adventure comes down to gut level feelings. Bush, Cheney, Ashcroft, and friends? Well, they're dicks! Why on earth would I feel inclined to support the drum beating of that morally righteous, super-uptight, incurious bunch of jerks?

I know that is not much of an intellectual, factual argument, but it is real to me. Sort of "if yer agin my friends then your agin me" only in a different way. I get the same feeling if ever I hear the local talk radio outlet with Rush and all of the lesser Rushs. Essentially, I think all of those folks are dicks. I think if it was they who proposed something like clean drinking water, I would have to view the proposal with suspicion. I probably don't have to worry about that, though!