3/11    Told you it was all one big bluff.  GW's people just ain't that
        crazy, and Powell was on board, so you knew we weren't attacking:
        (until later that is)
        "The goal is to not have a war. The goal is to have the pressure be
        so great that Saddam Hussein cooperates," said Defense Secretary
        Donald Rumsfeld. "Short of that, an unwillingness to cooperate, the
        goal is to have the capabilities of the coalition so clear and so
        obvious that there is an enormous disincentive for the Iraqi
        military to fight against the coalition and there is an enormous
        incentive for Saddam Hussein to leave and spare the world a
        conflict."
        \_ when did you tell us this?  the war is going to happen.
           \_ search ~mehlhaff/tmp/motd,v for "You heard it here first"
        \_ gee, anonymous motd poster, you're smart!
        \_ If we don't go to war I will vote for Bush
        \_ If we don't go to war I will vote for Bush
           \_ Ah know! :D
        \_ so how come the rest of the world doesn't get what the US is
           doing and/or go along with it?
           \_ The U.S. is backing down.  You'll see more signs over the next
              few weeks.
              \_ We may be backing down politically but we're stepping-up
                 the military actions.
           \_ Apparently because the world is full of idiots who are more
              interested in looking good and making useless symbolic statements
              than actually getting anything done.
              \_ Thanks for joining us! Have a seat.
              \_ Can't we all just get along?
                 \_ Depends.  Are we French, German, and Russian and making
                    or hoping to make huge bucks off Iraq?
                       German equipment to develope nuclear and chemical
                       weaponry is grossly exaggerated.
                    \_ The importance of Iraq as a customer for French and
                       German equipment to nuclear and chemical weaponry is
                       grossly exaggerated.
        \_ And all it cost was the goodwill and trust of Old Europe, the
           Muslim population, and most of the UN. Plus maybe $10 billion for
           military costs.
           \_ And don't forget NATO!
              \_ Good riddance on all of that, except the $10B.
              \_ France?  Don't want it, never had it.  (I was actually in
                 Paris post 9/11, and there was *no* goodwill.  If anything,
                 there was a snickering you-deserved-it attitude.)  Muslim?
                 Never had it, never will.  UN?  Let's talk about things that
                 matter, should we?  But I forgot, we're talking about France,
                 so obvious we are not into relevance.  $10b?  That's welfare
                 for engineers and defense corps.
           \_ The UN?  It's mostly third world dictators.  They understood
              that when they created it thus the security council exists.
                \_ CA would veto the war resolution too.
              What they didn't deal with was the fact that certain nations
              with permanent seats had no business having such a gift.  If
              France and GB can have seats, I think CA and Texas should too