I didn’t. Partly because I think that if anything was going to stop this, the weapons inspectors’ report would stop it (
Iraq, as Nick so elequontly put it
appears to have a tin opener.), and partly because I was due to spend the evening in a pub in Cambridge, taking salt and speaking of affairs with people.
That is, the ‘speaking of affairs’ was with people, the speaking was not of ‘affairs with people’. The problem with floridless is ease of misunderstanding
I agree with Tom in part, in that my main objection to this whole event is not that we appear to be fighting against Iraq (Though the lack of expressed logical reason – or evidence for given logical reasons – is a major factor) it’s more that we appear to be riding rough-shod over sixty-odd years of established procedure to do so. I don’t trust Bush to do anything more than protect his interests, and I don’t trust Blair at all. In fact, the only thing I think would stop Blair supporting this action would be for him to think it would damage his chances of re-election beyond repair.
Then there is the
Oh, when we said Never Again, we only really meant Never Again against Japan, who are our friends at the moment. We have toys that go Boom, you expect us not to use them? thing, which is just too scary for me to even consider. (Both links via Nick)