ariolanine said:
They most certainly are. That is the cornerstone of their argument. That is all they are saying.
Well then I agree, those people saying that are stupid.
But I am anti-war, and I don't say this, so don't claim that this is the position of the anti-war movement. That would be as ridiculous as me saying that all americans believe in the death penalty.
I think you may also be misunderstanding people who are saying that there needs to be substantial evidence of his WMD. So far the US's "intelligence" has failed to come to anything. It has been proved wrong time and again. Evidence is the basis of law. We don't throw people in prison because we "suspect" they've done something. That is the sort of thing that dictators like Saddam do, not people pursuing the cause of "freedom" as George Bush so sanctimoniously repeats every time he opens his inarticulate mouth.
I am sure Saddam has some nasties in his closet, but I doubt that he has much, nor is he any more of a threat (to other countries or his own people) than countless other regimes in the region and world, many of which are US allies.
If you maintain they don't have WMD then what is the "this" that is being dealt with?
The false crisis whipped up by Bush and his cronies. Saddam and his few WMDs can be dealt with through inspections and containment.
Which is what?? Improving the American economy? Getting rid of an evil dictator? Please don't respond with "stealing oil." If we wanted to do that we would invade Canada, Mexico, or Venezuela. All of whome provide us with more oil than Iraq could ever hope to pump out.
You must be joking? You have been a party to countless threads about this topic. Do you have a bad memory. Go and re-read past threads. I see no need to rehash the same arguments that have been voiced on this site time and time again.
As for your Mexico/venezuela oil theory I have responded to that false theory about 20 times already! You also need to learn a little bit about economics.
They aren't saying anything besides "no war." People would give more respect to the anti war movement if they would offer a viable alternative, but they have not so far.
Weapons inspections and containment. And before you go spouting off the propaganda designed to undermine the weapons inspectors go and research the FACTS.
Your President is right, there are people out there who don't consider Saddam to be the threat that he does. I am one of them. I consider the USA a big threat, however. The Hussein threat has been played up to serve a conservative agenda. If there was Democrat in office this whole "crisis" wouldn't exist and just as has been the case for the last 12 years, Saddam would continue to be a fragile dictator in charge of a powerless country.
Most of us disagree with the anti war movement because they are only causing trouble (ie.. vandalism, assualting police and pedestrians, disorderly conduct, etc...) And before you start saying "only a small number of protesters do that" remember that if you throw a party and invite everyone, you are responsible for who shows up.
Whatever your opinions about this behaviour, it is casuing a hell of a lot less disruption and damage than the coalition forces are in Iraq.
Please Scroll Down to See Forums Below 
GNWO?
