All right, aldo, I'll bite...
Fact 1: Most of the prisoners at Guantanamo Bay do not fall under the provosions of the Geneva Convention, since they were non-uniformed combatants and were not fighting for an officially declared army. Regardless of that, however, their being foreign has nothing to do with it. And, this may surprise you, but I'd like to see them go to trial. This is also one case that I feel should be decided by the Supreme Court. I know that there have been legal challenges, and if the action is declared constitutional, I will agree with that decision. Until then, however, I have no problem with the prisoners being held. However, I would prefer that they were formally charged.
Fact 2: Bush did not lie about the WMDs. The entire world community had the same intelligence, and they all assumed that Saddam had relatively active WMD programs and stockpiles. Unfortunately, that assumption was wrong. Operating on flawed intelligence does not make a lie; it makes an error. Also, I think that the media has hyped the WMD issue far more than Bush did before deciding to invade. Regardless of this fact, though, I stand by Bush's assertion that the invasion was for the best, regardless of whether or not WMDs are found in Iraq. I'm also very curious as to what actually happened to the weapons we know Saddam had after the Gulf War. Were they destroyed? Shipped to Syria? That's what we have to find out.
Fact 3: Has the Patriot Act ever been used to encroach upon someone's civil rights? I'm not asking what it says; I'm asking how it's been used. I'm well aware that, if pushed to its limits, the act could potentially violate civil rights, but, until this point, it has not been enforced in such a fashion. It may have been too much, but legislation was needed, and it is something, at least. I'm hoping that a better law can be formulated as a replacement, but until then, I'm not uncomfortable in the least with the act. Until the Supreme Court declares it unconstitutional, it is technically constitutional. As for the ISP issue, I was not aware of such legislation, but I would oppose it.
Fact 4: The issue of homosexual marriage has nothing to do with this thread, nor should it be brought into this thread. This board has seen enough flamewars over this issue; I'll kindly ask you to drop it. As for being only religiously motivated, I hardly think so; there are also societal and psychological arguments to be made against it. Just because the issue is espoused by a certain religious group or groups does not make the issue motivated only by religious reasons. That's all I'll say in the matter.
Fact 5: Yes, I do believe that Iraq will eventually become a stable and well-functioning society, and that the current troubles will be nothing more than a memory. The Iraqi people will make their voices heard; they will create a better future for themselves, with or without our help.
Edit: Not a monster, Genryu? I think it's you who is missing the facts. Do things like the actions of Uday and Qusay, the secret police squads, the rape and abuse of women, and the treatment of the Iraqi soccer team ring any bells? I think those qualify for moster status. Rampant carpet-bombing? I don't know about you, but I don't think that smart bombs qualify as that. Overall, the invasion was conducted with great restraint to avoid as much civilian loss of life as possible. True, there were civilain casualties, but these are unavoidable in any war. Also, I'm not sure where you hail from, but what is your country doing to help Iraq? Not as much as we have done, I'll warrant. Removing a dangerous and psychopathic dictator is far from "forcing" democracy, and as far as I'm concerned, it definitely qualifies as help.
