Do the Ben Franklin test..........draw a line down the middle of a piece of paper and on one side write down why liberation would be good, and on the other why it would be bad, because those are the two choices.<br><br>First off, I want to say clearly that I am for this war. My "Hollywood Anger" post a few weeks ago should make that clear.<br>That being said, the Ben Franklin test is not quite right. Yes, there are two choices - being liberated and not being liberated. However, if we choose that a liberated Iraq is better than a non-liberated Iraq, this does not necessarily mean going to war is the best solution.<br>Theoretically, there could be numerous solutions. There are those opposed to the war that favor a liberated Iraq and believe there are peaceful means of achieving that. I personally think they are "all wet", but nevertheless they favor a free Iraq...their methods of achieving a free Iraq are other than war. Additionally, there are those that favor a free Iraq believing that the consequences of the US going to war outweigh the possible liberation of Iraq. Again, I disagree, but these people can't be accused of being against a liberated Iraq.<br><br>I guess what is a bit annoying to me is that those of us FOR the war (I am guilty of this too, certainly) label everybody against the war as being "pro-Saddam". Certainly many are, especially in Hollywood, the media, etc. However, some are very anti-Saddam. Their problem is not that they are anti-America or anti-Christian, it is that they are idealists. They sincerely believe it possible to enact radical political change peacefully! This is the rare exception. <br><br>It is the same with abortion, actually. There are those who are pro-abortion who sincerely do not understand that they are killing a baby. They have been duped into believing that life does not begin at conception, but only at 1) An arbitrary stage in development, or 2) At birth. These people, although they are certainly just as guilty of killing, do not understand the truth of the matter. Similarly, those who are against the war AND against Saddam do not understand the ramifications of NOT going to war. If we don't go to war, nothing changes. Saddam would have continued to slaughter thousands, depriving his people while living in riches. <br><br>Steve<br>

Grace is not common.