[dd74]

Hey Bo: I too have reservations about our operations in Iraq. However, I do find that it is necessary to keep in check certain regions from which reserves such as oil are produced. If ever there was doubt that Iraqi oil might be threatened by Saddam's regime, that threat has now been eliminated. This results in not just a freedom of fear that Iraq could hold hostage its oil reserves, but that the United States and European nations have adequate oil supplies in the future.

What troubles me about the so-called world view is how that view vacillates between hatred and appeasement. The countries that matter - France and Germany - who produce things other than two makes of automobile, cheese and chocolate (Sweden), have opted to release Iraq from their debt, which is an indirect "thank you" to the U.S. for risking soldiers and reputation to rid a country of its dictator. Again, I'm not saying this "war" is justified, but yet what do you think would happen if we left things "as was?"

Can you see Saddam NOT cutting off oil reserves?

Can you see Saddam NOT upsetting the precarious balance of the Middle East?

Can you see Saddam NOT possessing a weapon of mass destruction and using it at will, anywhere, even Sweden?

If you cannot see this, then your argument is valid, and your name calling (hypocritical to say the least as you asked us not to call names), would be allowed.

As far as I see, Sweden, more or less, like many other countries, is benefitting from U.S. money, efforts, bullets and lives.

Honestly, I would be a little more appreciative and less critical.