A lot of you have been writing in and asking when I was going to "climb on my soapbox" and express my feelings about the possibility of war and how that affects us here in America and overseas, so I have.

As always, I welcome your thoughts whether you agree with me or not.

I welcome you to write in response to what I have said and we will include some of them on the website. We won't use any personally identifiable information other than your first name and where you are from. So here we go. . .

In the Middle Ages people believed that the planets revolved around each other on disks. When God was in his Heaven and all was right with the world, these disks would gently rub against each other and produce a harmonious sound that was described as The Music of the Spheres. When the affairs of Man fell into disarray this music turned discordant and "Bad Things" happened here on earth. The worst kind of discord was caused by "unnatural" acts, deeds that flew in the face of The Natural Order Of Things...e.g. the killing or deposition of the King. Many felt that Henry Bolingbroke's usurpation of the throne of England from Richard II, signaled the start of the long and bloody War of the Roses that plunged England into anarchy and Civil War. Such treachery upsets the Music of the Spheres.

I don't know about you, but I have felt for a long time now that the Spheres are cacophonous with discord these days. From the minute a certain person took the throne here (or at least the mantle of Chief Executive) despite losing the popular vote by half a million, things have gone to Hell in a hand basket! Surely the most nonpartisan hermit would have to agree that this Administration has been nothing short of a disaster -- of epic proportions. Domestic policy is in tatters with Clinton's trillion dollar surplus drowning in red Ink: millions unemployed: health benefits cut: basic freedoms ignored: savaging of environmental protections and loosening of controls on Industry that have thrown our balanced ecosystem into a nose dive, from which it may never recover: Tax cuts that continue to divide the "haves" and "have nots" on either side of a chasm wider than has ever been seen in this society: cuts in education: criminal collusion with Energy company conspiracies to defraud states and customers: tax break handouts to the top 5% and harsher treatment to those on welfare ...the list is as long as it is embarrassing.

If Domestically we are looking somewhat shaky, our foreign policy is on the verge of downright collapse. In less than two years we have gone from being the object of the world's sympathy and support to being the number one pariah. As a result of a bull-headed obsession with a son's revenge for his father's nemesis and a renewed sense of Manifest Destiny, The United States has become the target for widespread International scorn and distrust. Never before has our relationship to Europe been so strained, never before has our arrogance and high-handedness brought the world so close to catastrophe. It is somewhat ironic that these same people, who distracted the last President and the country away from Al Quaeda and the threats emanating from Iraq with meaningless and irrelevant gadflies like Monica and Whitewater, are now using some of those same kind of issues to distract us from the truly awesome threat erupting out of North Korea. You think Sadam is trouble? Boy, are you in for a nasty surprise! This archaic notion that we can force the world to behave the way we wish it to is not only sadly immature, but dangerously misguided.

This country, like a singularity, exploded, fully formed, out of a noble idea and political experiment in autonomous self-determination. It proclaimed itself a beacon of freedom and compassion for the oppressed. It never shrunk from a responsibility to preserve and empower those rights enshrined in its Constitution. Yes, there were times when it hurt, times when it nearly rent the country apart. There were times when the struggle to do the right thing seemed to exact too high a price, but America, the idea, never lost sight of its promise to the world.

Now, we stand at a crossroad, probably as significant a crossroad as we have ever encountered. This Administration would have us continue headlong along the road they have mapped out for us. A road pitted with religious intolerance, financial inequity, isolated paranoia, Orwellian oversight and elitist cronyism. Despite the slimmest, if not nonexistent, mandate, it has always been "my way or the Highway" with this Government. When opposition to any of its avowed intents has surfaced, an Executive Order has been lobbed like a hand-grenade to blow away any debate. The "Fox in the Henhouse " policy has been used to maximum effect in both Cabinet posts, as well as the judiciary. I would say it is as if the inmates were running the asylum, but, unfortunately, these guys are not crazy. It is, nevertheless, a serious and dangerous situation.

War on Iraq would be a terrible mistake. The one person who stands to gain most from such a scenario is Osama Bin Laden. Our restrained reaction to 9/11 robbed him of the chance to ignite a pan-Arab Jihad against the Judaeo-Christian Crusader. By contrast, the sight of an American General sitting in the seat of Government in Bagdhad will be a red rag to the Islamic bull and all Hell will break loose. We will isolate ourselves from the rest of the world and feel the distinct chill of an international "outsider." It will be costly in terms of human suffering on both sides. Sadam's weapons are not as threatening as many other nations (especially North Korea). And finally, a conquering American presence in that part of the world will upset the delicate balance of power for ever and we will never be able to withdraw, save in the same embarrassing and shameful way we pulled out of Saigon.

The argument that 9/11 changed the world is true only in that it served notice to our general population that we live in a complicated and dangerous place. There are people and countries that would do us harm-but that has always been the case. We have never been slow to wreak horrible vengeance on those that harm us and that is our right of self-defense and should always be so. The question now is: at what point does the self-protector become the bully? Do we flex our muscles and promise a "whipping" to any who might challenge us or question our way of life? Or do we stay true to those blood-soaked ideals that gave us birth? Do we, once again, seize the moral high-ground and by example, show the world that compassion, justice, equality, patience and debate are the ONLY choices a civilized Nation can make?

I believe we must listen to others if we are to hear an accurate assessment of ourselves, I believe we must learn that humility is not the same as weakness. I believe that the Universe as well as the rest of the world is putting us on notice and we must tread, oh, so wisely right now if we are ever to hear the sweet Music of the Spheres again.

God Bless us one and all,
Charlie

Just a few more thoughts on the Eve of War.

Given that Saddam is a monster, feared and hated by the vast majority of his countrymen (otherwise, why a "war of Liberation") and given this country's past experience and success with fomenting revolution and regime-change in foreign countries (Chile, Guatemala etc.) could we not have done the same in Iraq for a lesser price-tag than all-out-war?

Can we please decide BEFORE we invade whether this is a "war of Liberation," an unendorsed enforcement of UN resolution 1441 or part of the ongoing "war on terror?" I think it important that the Commander in Chief at least makes it clear to his troops what he is putting them in harm's way for! (and while I'm at it, might I add a couple of alternative motives? An Imperialist land-grab ( or oil-grab,) unfinished business from '91 or an expensive " Wag the Dog" to distract from mounting problems with a flawed domestic agenda?

Going back to what I said about National Sovereignty: every country has a right to defend itself. We now know that Iran, Iraq's natural and mortal enemy, is well into a "fast-track" nuclear weapons program. Given that Saddam has NEVER attacked this country and would have nothing to gain by doing so! That's right, a world-wide Islamic Jihad is the last thing this decadent, secular despot wants!! Given all that , can we really expect him to leave himself vulnerable to a pre-emptive strike from just across his border? And is it fair to ask him? Look, the Pandora?s Box is wide open and the mischief is everywhere. It is far too late to try to stuff it back in. We live in a world where weapons of mass destruction already proliferate; Israel, Pakistan, India, North Korea, South Africa, the UK, France etc. etc. already have them and Iran is close behind. I am nervous that any of these have nuclear capability, although ONLY the USA has both used nuclear weapons against it's enemies, and only USA continues to threaten such use. The only chance the world has of avoiding the use of such weapons is a return to the doctrine of Mutually Assured Destruction that kept the peace through the Cold War. Only this time it must apply to ALL the Nations in the world. As long as EVERYONE has them, there is a chance no one will want to use them. Only when the aggressor can feel immune to nuclear retaliation can he threaten a nuclear attack. But what about the terrorist? What about the individual who has no Nation to be concerned about, who is engaged in a war between ideas and not territory? Believe me, Al Quaeda does not have to wait for Saddam to open shop in the WMD marketplace, there are plenty of willing merchants already able and willing to do business with anyone with the cash. So it seems we have come to a point in our civilization when the horror of mass conflagration and destruction is at the fingertips of everyone with a grievance or gripe. Perhaps we have finally "uninvented" war! The only way forward is to take away the reasons for enmity and distrust. Our survival depends now on the balancing of wealth, opportunity and living conditions around the planet. Diplomacy, trade, respect, and education are the weapons of this new world order. Exploitation and imperialism of ANY color will protract resentment, anger and hostility: in this post nuclear age, with WMD's two-a-penny, the consequences of such short-sightedness are unimaginable. By invading Iraq, we might have kept the nuclear option out of the hands of one tyrant, but are we seriously going to consider invading North Korea or Iran next?

Whatever the case: in a short while over 250,000 US and British troops will be putting their lives on the line. I want to make this abundantly clear. My criticism of this war has nothing whatsoever to do with those men and women who are doing the fighting for us. I have nothing but respect and gratitude for their sacrifice, their courage and their professionalism. I know that they will take no relish from having to kill Iraqis, military or civilian, nor from being shot at themselves. I wish them all a safe return to their loved ones.

That does not preclude any of us from disagreeing wholeheartedly with the politicians who set this chain of events in motion. No one doubts that the Generals and politicians who unleashed the horrors of the First World War acted recklessly and shamefully, yet no one questions the valor and sacrifice of the millions who were butchered as a result of this folly. Many of those who prosecuted the War in Vietnam have since come to see how erroneous it was. Were it not for the Peace Protesters during the sixties and seventies, we might still be mired in that protracted bloodbath. So let's put an end to this ridiculous notion that, in some way, those who protest the War are undermining our troops.

Patriotism has nothing to do with War and everything to do with loving one's country.

Is this doctrine of Pax Americana any different from that of Pax Romana, a doctrine of manifest destiny that eventually unraveled the Roman Empire and left the once -great -promise to the world a smoldering pile of ruins picked over by barbarians and Goths!!

Finally a note to those who feel outraged that "celebrities" are voicing their opinions. A question: if the man who was arrested a few weeks ago in a shopping mall in Massachusetts for wearing a "Peace" T-Shirt had been a TV Star, would his arrest have been more or less justified?

WOW!!! I am so excited that this column has inspired such vigorous and opinionated debate! I am even more excited that those who disagree with me, (and some of you REALLY do!!! ) have felt comfortable enough to post their thoughts too. Thank You! This is what this country is about: and for too long there has been an apathy and disconnect between citizens, and what they feel about what is being done in their name. I have been reading a weighty tome on the years leading up to the Civil War, and I was amazed at the passions and debate that engulfed citizens from every walk of life and of every socio-economic group. The man in the street was just as fired up as the professional "Talking Heads." I know many of you hold reservations as to whether an Actor's Website is the correct place to hold these debates and express these opinions, but, you know what?.... if not here, where? and if not me, then who?

OK, that said, there are a couple of things that I want to clear up. Some of you seem to have misunderstood some pretty important positions I hold, and should express a little more clearly. First: be in no doubt that I consider Saddam Hussein a member of the same tyrannical, Dictator's Club that boasts Hitler, Stalin, Pol Pot, Idi Amin and all those other embodiments of Evil as alumni. I think anyone who put an end to his barbaric, unconscionable ways would be doing the world a huge service. He has subjected his people to unspeakable deprivation and misery, and has no limit to his ego and ambition.

Second: as a lawyer I found International Law extremely interesting and no doctrine more controversial and challenging than that of national Sovereignty. This states that every country has the Sovereignty to carry out its affairs as it wishes. Clearly, as we have seen in pre-war Germany and in the Balkan states and in parts of Africa (to name but a few) this doctrine is often incompatible with the Doctrine of Basic Human Rights. The way round it is to say that only when a majority of impartial countries agree that a line has been crossed ,and that the Laws of the International Community are in jeopardy can the International Community act to contain the transgressor and disregard, or at least, over - rule the offending county's National Sovereignty.

Third: I would like to distinguish what we have in Iraq with what occurred in Nazi Germany. The Nazis were rounding up, and transporting Jehovah's Witnesses, Gypsies, Homosexuals and Jews since around 1935. The International Community knew about this and chose to do nothing. At that time there was no United Nations, there was no machinery to impose sanctions and isolate a country for its crimes, there was no legitimate method of intervention in another country's business or limit to its National Sovereignty. War would have been the ONLY option then to stop Hitler's horrendous acts. No one was willing to take that step until he invaded Poland, another Sovereign Nation, to whom the British had bound themselves by treaty.

OK, just wanted to get those things straight. Now, please continue to let me have it!!!

Here is what you had to say. These are your opinions, that you have written in, as a reaction to what I have written above. I encourage you to use this forum to have your voices heard. . . .

From Dale in Tennessee - I give up . . .

The grandchild who told me about this web site has correctly told me that I am too old to get involved in this type of thing and that she is sorry she told me about it. I have been reminded that letting people that I don't even know make me cry because I think they don't understand me is ridiculous. She's right. I refuse to shed any more tears over what I consider to be your misunderstanding of what I said versus what someone else said. This is my first and last attempt to participate in an internet chat room or bulletin board or whatever this is. I apparently am not thick skinned enough. Good bye

From Jamie in Texas - To Dale from Tennessee . . .

I don't see what you are referring to about being misquoted. When I read your posting, it seemed perfectly obvious to me, that you had been forwarded an email with a file (which I went and listened to) and that the file you were referring to was from the forwarded email. I'm guessing that the part in parentheses that said: (NOTE: the file attachment that Dale refers to can be found at this URL address: http://www.wlsam.com/showdj.asp?DJID=1574) was written by the webmaster of Mr. Shaughnessy's site.

It was also perfectly obvious that the first 3 paragraphs, except for the part about where to find the file, were written by you and the second two were from the forwarded email. But if you disagreed with what the person who forwarded you the email said, you certainly didn't indicate that from anything that I could see.

The last part of your posting said "If anyone knows how to reach (short of a lobotomy) those ignorant entertainers, and others who oppose the action to weed out Suddam and his brutal regime, and to check there for the probability of chemical and biological stashes, please send them this! ?Please. ?No, better yet ... play it for them, as they may not be able to read."

It looks like you then sent it to Mr. Shaughnessy, who is an entertainer, asking him to listen to the file, along with telling him that you no longer wanted to see anything that he was in, but there was no disclaimer that you felt any differently than what the words in that paragraph above, that was forwarded to you, that you then sent on to him to go up on the soapbox, said.

So how is that misquoting you?

From Dale in Tennessee - Jamie in Texas and Charles in California . . .

I am appalled that I have been misquoted. As I am sure that Charles Shaughnessy is well aware, I forwarded him an email that I was sent along with a 2 paragraph comment of my own. I would never suggest that anyone get a lobotomy. The liberal press often misquotes people so I guess I should have expected this to happen. The first 2 paragraphs are mine, the last 2 are not. That was very obvious in the email that I forwarded. Let's see if this retraction gets printed.

From Dominique in Germany - Soapbox - About this war . . .

Dear Charlie and friends.

I wasn't going to speak up since I had already posted twice but with the recent developments regarding the war in Iraq and reading some of the comments posted on this site, I felt I had to.

First of all let me say a few words about Dale's comment. As Jamie, Charles and others on this forum pointed out so very well - we have the freedom of the speech and everyone is entitled to their opinion. It is one thing to disagree and explain how you feel, it is, however, another thing to attack people you don't even know personally just because you feel they don't do the 'right' thing (the way you want them to be). It truly shocked me to read Dale's words on the soapbox but I also am aware that no matter where I go, there will always be people who will go further than just to'disagree'. To see what people would do to cause other people 'pain' is truly troubling and sets me thinking. Sometimes, as hard as it may seem, you need to understand that thinking goes before writing. Trust me, I am speaking from personal experience. Sometimes, in the heat of the moment, you know that words just 'slip out somehow' and you feel awful but you can't take them back. Or can you? It's ok, we are all human and we forgive, not all but most of us certainly do. They know we all have our faults, good and bad days. There's a saying we use in Germany that goes by 'do as you would be done by' (don't do things that might hurt others cause you know you wouldn't want them to do the same to you?). It upsets us when we find out that the person we sort of identified ourselves with has an opinion different from ours, or let it be just a friend, a relative who confronts you with a situation you don't know how to handle. It's hard to accept it, very hard sometimes, but, in my humble opinion it just proves how much of a mature person you are if you are able to accept things the way they are. Keep in mind that we, unlike other countries we've just 'invaded', are in democratic state, not a dictatorship and we are allowed to speak our mind and will not get our heads cut off..so for doing so - that leaves us plenty of space to vent?to a certain extent that is.

I, too, was surprised to see Charlie put Dale's post on this forum but he's been doing this with other posts, too and I would have been surprised if he hadn't. It only shows that he has way more decency than some of us may think. He is, just like Jamie said, a fair man and seems to weigh up the pros and cons (at least that's what I got from reading his posts ? correct me if I'm wrong), likes to read what we think, worldwide. While I know that I am told be a very tolerant person I know I would have hesitated to put some of the comments that he received on the forum, for everyone's sake but then again the 'hot' stuff made a very good discussion among people of all ages, nationalities and backgrounds. So thank you, Charlie, for making them available.

As where anti-US German 'activities' re the war in Iraq is concerned, I can confirm what Liane, fellow German, keeps saying. No-one ever said it would be easy, we knew that the war would affect us all, more or less, thinking of the families with family members sent to war, unwanted casualties, anger among the countries. Some people it seems, though, must have believed that those of us being anti-war supported the Saddam regime which is not true (as said in various online resources, papers, on TV). I can't talk for others but let me tell you how I felt. I hated the idea of a war from the very beginning but I knew that the Saddam regime had to be stopped to put an end to all the 'pain' he had caused to his own people over the years as an Iraqi leader. Looking back, I know I felt it could have been done a more 'humane' way than to throw bombs on Iraq and kill thousands but innocent people in the process, in this 'war of liberation'. I hated the fact that neither one of us ever really found out the truth about certain matters, such as the real number of vicitims in this war. They speculate that the number is up to 1,174 but it may be higher. General major Stanley McCrystal said that 80,000 bombs were used in this war and they must have killed thousands if not ten thousands on both sides. But as General Tommy Franks said at the beginning of this war 'We don't do body counts'

Now that the Saddam regime is supposedly over, I am truly happy for the Iraqi people and wish them all the best for their future life, in a democracy. With the war, however, still going on and more anti-war demonstrations planned for Germany, I think that what most of us here want to bring across is that we don't want to see any more harm done, we'd like to solve this in a peaceful way ? whether this is possible, I don't know but that's what most people I talked to thought. I remember watching a documentary on German TV a couple of weeks ago, where they showed Israeli children on their way to school wearing gas masks and atropine. When I grabbed a copy of the 'Stern' at about that time and flipped through the pages, I came across a picture of a young girl with torn feet. With all that pain not being bad enough, I'm thinking of another negative 'side effect', the way Americans felt with their 'country' being hated. I have a good friend in Texas who sent me an Instant Message on AOL the other day while talking to my colleague at work which said 'I just wanted to say hello from the world's most hated country'. It saddened me and I hated to see my friend go through that but there was no way for me to explain and make her feel better cause she had already left and I haven't had a chance to talk to her since.

Another thing I would like to draw your attention to is the way the US were with their own people as were the freedom of the press is concerned. There is a line in the 'Westside Story' , it's 'Ev'rything free in America. For a small fee in America!'. With America labeled as the 'land of the free', the freedom seems to stop right there. As an example. . .young Americans sent letters, emails to German news magazines asking them to make the pictures, letters available to the public, quote 'cause they would never publish anything like this in the USA' leaving the population in the dark about certain things in this war. Some people on this forum said that our governments should protect the country WE live in and then, if at all, help the people in need. I agree, there's so much to be done for the people but I also think that we need to be there for others and risk getting kicked by others at each and every end and most of all be open for new things and don't hide behind 'books of old traditions' that seem to run very well for us but could be improved if we seriously considered changing them. Sometimes I believe we 'normal people' would be better politicians than any of the Bushs, Schroeders, Blairs. . . They seek a better life for their people but most of all they seek a healthy political environment, good political relations..they make decisions that are supposed to make our lives better but those decisions often turn out to cause more pain and trouble than intended, as brought up on this board. We can't go on pretending everything is well where we know it isn't no matter where you are but politicians spend millions on 'political matters' where education, end unemployment, feed the poor would be so much more important than fighting about the pros and cons of whether a minister should be allowed to get his own private plane for a private trip and even use political accounts for private matters which is even worse.

So, that said, I'm hoping that we can put an end to this war very soon. Now let me ask you. . .What do you personally feel could be done in order to build up a democratic Iraq and how do you think this could affect the Iraqi people, the other Arabic states, Europe, the US, Australia and other countries? Would love to hear what other people think. Thank you very much for listening.

From Dimphy in Holland - another soapbox respond...I guess . . .

So...the war is over...or is it? I must admit that for the last couple of days it hasn't been troubling my mind as much as it did before. Probably because I'm just too busy with all kinds of stuff, but today it crossed my mind again. I'm studying to become a teacher and today I was a guest-teacher in the 6th grade, just to find out how things work there etc. They had this special newsstand, build up with all kinds of articles about Iraq and the US and the war and everything. The teacher gave me the opportunity to run the class for like an hour (which was really cool, btw) and I thought it would be cool to start a discussion about the war: Is it justified or not?

It was just beautiful to see 11/12 year-olds talking and thinking about a subject like this and they came up with some really good arguments about why it's justified or why it's not justified. It makes me happy to see that the Iraqi-people are truly happy that Saddam is no longer in charge. I just feel sorry for the chaos they're in right now. I'm sure of the fact that this war has been a good thing, on the other hand it makes me wonder: what's next? I guess I'll talk about that with my students, the next time I'm there. As for now: God bless us all, in the name of the Father, the Son and the Holy Ghost, Amen!

From Liane in Germany - Comment . . .

Dear Mr .Shaughnessy

First of all I would like to make a comment on Dale from Tennnessee. I wonder in what state of paranoia this person must be in, to write something so nasty! Of course persons like Dale will now say ?told you so Bush was in the right? but be assured only Bagdad and Basra are fully occupied. I am more afraid than before ,because if Saddam is still alive he will retalliate in a terrible way, or he has supplied many of the anti American terror groups with his arsenal which could be weapons of mass destruction.Incidentally where are these weapons for which all this bloodsheddding was started? Another thing Dale lives in the snug South of the USA and doesn`t or didn?t hear the B-52 Bombers flying over like we do here in Germany and they aren?t always empty!!. Mr Shaughnessy I admire your ?fairplay? ( a very British virtue ! )that you even bothered to spare space for such comment which is nasty and goes under the decency line.

On Tuesday 8th April Sir Peter Ustinov was on a talk show here in Germany and here are some of the things he said which I think speaks for a great number of people. First he said he was ashamed of Blair ,then he said that he doesn?t know what to believe any more as there is so much propaganda from both the Alliance partners, in fact he said comparing to what is going on ,Goebbels (the Nazi propaganda minister)was a new born baby!! Finally, he said that Bush with his ?holy army ?is starting an epoche of colonialism again. We all now know what results that brought to those countries. (India,.Indonesia and African countries).

On this show also was an old Middle East expert named Peter Scholl-Latour who now is aged 80 years but is still active and was in Bagdad just before the overunning of Iraq began, and he says that one thing Bush has managed to do. is to get an unified Arab World which could mean there will be a super Intifada! No Arab country wants the US on their territory, because through past expierences the only interests Bush & Co. have, are business interests and don?t really care for the citizens. Other countries are left to do this. e.g. the UN will be good enough to repair the physical and most of all the psychological damage that has been done.

I do hope that those soldiers out there will get help and support from their fellow citizens when they return home . We here see them on TV how traumatised these boys are! I don?t think these pictures are broadcast in the US! Incidentally one French journalist said on TV after Bagdad was taken in ?up until now, we had Irqai minders, now we have US miliatary telling us what we can send?. So much for freedom of speech!! Peace for all of us.

From Ulrike in Germany - Don't believe everything . . .

I have read all the comments made in this forum, and it's particularly interesting for me to read the texts of those people who agree with Bush or at least think they can see "no other way but war". Not all but most of them have one particular argument in common: those people really seem to think this war has been started to liberate the Iraqi people, to help them get rid of a cruel tyrant who rules their country. They think the Bush administration does all this to HELP another people!

When I read this, I asked myself how naive a person can be. Believe me: welfare for other nations is the last thing on the minds of Bush and his allies! No war in the history of this world has ever been waged for welfare, and this one is no exception. The reasons behind this war are absolutely selfish. I think there is not THE one reason for it, but sure Iraq's oil is one, another one is that the Bush administration wants to distract the public eye from major domestic problems by turning the whole attention to a "foreign problem". And this war also helps them to improve the domestic situation to some extend: when you're at war, it is normally very good for your economy, because you can produce new weapons, tanks, munition, anything you need to wage a war. And don't forget that the media industry does also profit from this whole situation. The audience ratings must have increased dramatically, especially concerning the news and any documentary or discussion show that deals with the war. People want to be informed, of course. But think of this: the TV stations are dependent on as updated and detailed news as possible, because that's what the audience wants to see. And who decides which stations get access to the newest material and information? - The Bush administration. They are those who hold the information and distribute it the way they want. It is perfectly comprehensible that they favour those stations who make reports in favour of them, who give a picture of this war that is as positive as possible. Those are the simple laws of business.

So what I want to tell the people in the U.S., especially those who are not against this war: don't believe everything you see on the news! Don't take what you see there as the whole truth! You see people in Iraq who welcome the American troops, who are happy that they don't have to live under Saddam's regime any more, who feel liberated. This is what they show you. But have you also seen and heard interviews with all the worried and fearful Iraqi people, who feel confused and are not sure if this change in their country will be for their own good? Who think that living in a country ruled by the Americans (or a government appointed by the U.S.) won't be any more what they want than living under Saddam's regime? To be honest, I share their concern. This war was not for the poor Iraqi people, the peace that comes afterwards won't be either. Just as it has been in Afghanistan, where there is a government now that is accepted by the U.S. (because Karsai was chosen by them and brought to power by bribing many Afghan clan leaders at and before the election assembly), but not by the majority of the Afghan people. There has already been one attempt to kill Karsai, I'm sure it won't have been the last one. Afghanistan is still far from peace and stability. I see a similar future for Iraq.

From David in France - Precisions . . .

As I re-read my different posts, I realize they might sound a way I don't want them to.

First of all, I am absolutely against Saddam Hussein. I think he's a bloodthirsty dictator that did terrible things to his own people. He's a megalomaniac mad man, and should absolutely be "set aside". What I am concerned about now, is not the fact that the Anglo-American coalition is on the way to victory. Of course I wished they would be victorious once the war was started.

There are several concerns that popped up to my mind: - the Humanitarian condition of Iraq is dreadful: hospitals are full of injured people who, due to the lack of medicine, sometimes remain without a proper treatment for days, or are being operated without anaesthesia, (and I don't even want to talk about the essential needs such as food or water)The Red Cross and the other Humanitarian supplies cannot access the center of Iraq because the roads are not secure yet, and because of the general havoc the cities are in right now. - Iraq is a tribal country. When many people are relieved that Saddam has been defeated and acclaim the American troops in Baghdad, what's going to become of them once the American troops are gone? Yes, of course, they will remain there for a while, but setting a real democracy will be a really hard task in a country that has never, once in its existence, known a democratic government. Among the Iraqi opponents, who will take the leadership and be strong and faithful enough to his country not to turn into another Saddam? And that is to speak of a few, only.

Things were much different in Afghanistan, before the war against Russia and the obscurantism set by the Taliban, there used to be a king and the country had known a totally different way of living. So when the Taliban were defeated, Hamid Karzai rose and took the reins of the power in his own country. Yes, the American government helped, and is still helping, but back then, their attack on Afghanistan was entirely legitimate, and the entire world supported it. It is not the case in Iraq. Nobody can actually raise from the ashes of the country, and be the strong leader Hamid Karzai is to his country. I heard Dick Cheney say that the UN didn't have the power to get a central role in the reconstruction of Iraq. Once again I smiled bitterly. Who exactly is Dick Cheney? What kind of interest does he serve? Those of Iraq or his own?... No wonder he doesn't want the UN to stick their nose into the reconstruction of Iraq.

Oh yes, it's true, the Iraqi people have indeed been liberated from a truly evil dictator (and I'm not being ironic there), but what are they headed for now?... Some posts here attest that many American people are convinced that when they're right to protect their country by attacking Iraq, they should stop helping other countries. Have you ever wondered why so many countries in the world were against that war?... Do you think that almost the entire world has been infiltrated by evil and voluntarily wants to cross the American will of setting the Pax Americana over the world?... No. Like I said in one post, the world is not a desert street with the good guy and the bad guy fighting for the lady's honor. The world is not black or white, the world is grey, with its nice things and its bad things, and one has to accept that. Hans Blix was bitterly saying that he hoped the $ 65 billions the war is going to cost Mr. Bush, is at least going to bring results about massive destruction weapons, in balance to the $ 65 millions the UN inspections cost. In his opinion, and to many people, that war was decided very long ago, even way before 9/11. I would like to tell the American people to try and consider things under a different point of view, and to stop believing what they see on TV. The power of the image is strong and can sometimes have a devastating effect on one's judgment. Things that are presented to be the truth are sometimes only one side of the truth.

To give you an example - and that will be the end of this long speech. I once went to Washington D.C. and visited several museums there, among which the National museum of Air and Space. We were much surprised to learn that the poets Cyrano De Bergerac and Edmond Rostand once imagined reaching the Moon and that (at the time) the aircraft carriers France had were the "Fausch" and the "Clemancau" Once again, this was clearly announced in a National Museum. We were a little appalled to see that, First, Cyrano De Bergerac is a fictional hero by Edmond Rostand, and in a dialogue, he actually says his nose (which was famous for its length) might reach the moon. Second, France at the time had indeed two aircraft carriers, the FOCH and the CLEMENCEAU Only our little French ego was hurt by this?... Well we actually couldn't care less. What I wanted to stress in that example, is that even the most evident information can be distorted if seen only from one point of view. If a National Museum displays such information, you feel compelled to believe it. It's not always the truth... The same might happen with "the news." I'm not saying I hold the absolute truth, far from it. As a Philosopher once said, "all I know is that I know nothing." I try to stick to that thought, and to question the so-called truth all the time, it widens my view. Peace

from Jamie in Texas - I am once again shocked and disappointed . . .

In response to Dale from Tennessee: It is one thing to tell an entertainer that you are no longer going to watch anything that he is in because he has an opinion that is different from your own, and believe me, I support that right of yours, however, I am once again amazed and astonished that someone would still, after reading everything that Mr. Shaughnessy has writen here on his soapbox forum, interpret it as you have and would still, first of all, wish him a lobotomy, second of all, imply that he is ignorant and not able to read, but the most shocking thing you have written as far as I'm concerned, is that you equate Mr. Shaughnessy to be no different than this sick, horrible person that wrote the hateful email wishing these radio people's son be killed in the war!!! That sickens and disgusts me. Freedom of expression, including yours & mine, is our right, but I can't believe that after this viscious attack on his character, that he even put your response on his website, but to me, that just shows what an honorable and fair man that he is.

from Charles in California - Soapbox response to Dale in Tennessee . . .

While I appreciate more than you our Constitutional right to express political opinions about the actions of our elected representatives, be it sex with an aide or manipulating energy crises for profit or starting a war, I am disappointed that people such as yourself would abuse that First Amendment right by sending such vile poison over the internet. That you would wish a lobotomy on anyone is deeply troubling, especially as I have seen what it does to someone. That you should wish someone's child dead shows me the kind of bloodthirsty savage that is so gung - ho about this war. That you could be inured to the endless images of distraught fathers carrying lifeless children in the streets of Baghdad..... I feel pity and shame for you.

Now, go with the blessing of our Nation's Fathers and their sons to exercise your rights as you see fit.

from Shauna in the United States - Soapbox response . . .

Charlie,

???? I wish there was a way to end the problems without this war, but I really don't think there is. We are ending the horrible way people live in Iraq, and they appreciate it, as can be seen by them giving the thumbs up to soldiers on the news. I don't think we can go right after North Korea, even though that needs to be taken care of as quickly as possible. He? is a truly crazy man, and if he feels threatened he will not delay?an attack. Personally I think we should stick to protecting America and?leave other countries alone, but I know that will never happen. We will continue to?try to protect others, while putting ourselves at risk. I am only 15 and still have much to learn of the world, but I think the ideals are right. My father is in the army and could be shipped away at any time, but he too is ready to fight to help the Iraqi people.

from Julie in Illinois - More thoughts . . .

Dear Charlie:

I know a lot of people do not agree with this war, and I have the deepest respect for them. However, it really makes me sad that some people are really not hearing the whole story about different issues. I understand that some people in Iraq are not feeling liberated, and it is true, but I wish they could see that in some cities in Iraq are welcoming U.S. and British troops. I have seen it widely broadcasted on ABCNEWS. I know that a lot of people strongly disagree with Bush. I do not. I really feel that his intentions are good, and maybe something positive will come out of this. Please don't misunderstand me I don't want innocent people to die, but millions of innocent people were dying way before this war started. I know a lot of people will disagree with me, but I have to speak my mind. Quite honestly I wish this war would be over with, and our troops would come home, but I guess that would not be realistic. Thank you Charlie for having this forum, I have a lot of respect for you. Keep speaking out.

from David in France - Angriness and deep sorrow . . .

Everyday I try to see the logic in this war, everyday I try to convince myself that maybe the countries which didn't want the war were mistaken, and every evening I laugh bitterly at my own naivet?... Now I can't contain my anger anymore. What does George Walker Bush JUNIOR take us for?

They are so engrossed in their fight that they even bomb a hotel with journalists inside, killing 3 of them in the process... oh yes, some shootings were aimed at the American tanks from the hotel... Bull****! Do they really think we are THAT stupid?! Journalists for <**> sake!... One Ukrainian, and one Spaniard, the third one was killed after another tank aimed its bomb at another hotel with Al Jezirah and Abu-Dabi TV journalists were. ... And during that tragic episode, M. Bush and M. Blair were quietly discussing the share f Iraq after the war... Bush saying to Blair, "so OK, we'll take all the Oil ressources and the main contracts for electricity, water and so on,... and you take the crumbs..." And Blair to say: "Oh yes, George, yes of course... But let's not forget Jose Maria Aznar who has supported us too..." "Oh yes, of course... we'll give him the crumbs of the crumbs..." Pitiful.

Oh, need I mention that Condoleza Rice also went to Moscow and told President Putine that of course, the Russian interests in Iraq will be safe after the war... What do they want to do there? Seduce the Russians to isolate more the other Anti-war countries?... Set the discord between them?... This makes me want to vomit. What kind of game is that? What kind of place do they think the world is?... The is not a Monopoly game, neither a video game! I feel like all the people in the world have been trampled on by Bush Junior, like an obnoxious little brat would do a column of ants.

Oh, and I akmost forgot the terrible weapons of massive destruction the war was set because of! Tons of them, millions of gallons of chemical and bacteriological evil substances... Where are they?... What gives me the creeps now, is that "it's too easy"... Something indeed must have happened to Saddam, for they progress into Bagdad all too easily. What will prevent Bush from thinking: "see how easy it was?.. Let's do the same with Iran, or Lybia, or Syria, or ..." and that bloody feeling of helplessness: "what can we do to stop him?!" What can all the bloody world do to stop him?... I have no answer to that question...

From Dale from Tennessee - I am disappointed. . .

This is an email that was forwarded to me.? Please take the time to listen to the attachment.? (NOTE: the file attachment that Dale refers to can be found at this URL address: http://www.wlsam.com/showdj.asp?DJID=1574)

I don't see how you can possibly believe that we are not doing the right thing.? Have you been watching the news?? Did you see Saddam's torture chambers?? Did you hear what he has been doing to those people?? People ignored what was happening to the Jews and you?know?what happened then.? It's about time that someone stood up for these people.??Quite frankly, I think that the U.S. should quit giving aid to all of these countries that?have their hands out and then vote against us.? Maybe we should be isolationists and allow no immigrants (including those from England) and send no foreign aid.? Would you?like that better? ?

I really hate that I no longer want to see anything that you're in.? I loved you on Days of Our Lives and on The Nanny, but I just can't enjoy seeing you anymore.? While you certainly have freedom of expression in the U.S. (which you don't have in Iraq), I also have the freedom to turn off things I don't want to see and unfortunately that means, among others, you.

?If you are a Chicago area resident, you've probably heard about this incident on the Don and Roma call-in show on WLS. ?If not, you'll appreciate hearing it and perhaps you'll share it with others. ?It's quite moving. Here's what happened. ?Don and Roma's son is an F18 fighter pilot (and ex-Blue Angel and local Chicago celeb), who is stationed somewhere near Iraq now. ?An antiwar protester emailed Don and Roma stating that he hoped their son would die if the US goes to war against Iraq. It brought tears to Roma's eyes, but she still read this hateful email on the air. ?After hearing it read, an Iraqi-American girl named Angie called in and this is what she had to say.

Don and Roma are going to replay this file everyday until the war is over. If anyone knows how to reach (short of a lobotomy) those ignorant entertainers, and others who oppose the action to weed out Suddam and his brutal regime, and to check there for the probability of chemical and biological stashes, ?please send them this! ?Please. ?No, better yet ... play it for them, as they may not be able to read.

From one of your former biggest fans

from Liane in Germany - Bush's hypocrisy . . .

Mr.Shaughnessy!

I am angry how the US military inform the US citizens over the war in Iraq. As I have mentioned before that a lot of news isn't passed on in the US media correctly. I read in a Berlin paper that any press who publishes pictures of POW'S will be sued. The reason for this is not to stir up the anti war lobby in the US. Even "The Australian" a nationwide paper in Australia showed pictures of these unfortuneate young men and reported many more casualties than the US would admit. Also a local German paper showed a tank with bodies of dead Alliance soldiers hanging outside it. Of course it is not necessary to show such pictures, but war is terrible and consequently one is confronted with such horrific pictures. What I am trying to bring over is that US citizens should be aware that all is not well, and those of you who have the internet should inform themselves.

I have just seen a live report from Times Square where people were interviewed and all were against the war and most of all most of them realise they were not informed correctly. One chap said Bush should spend those billions of dollars on education so that the people become more educated which would result that people like Bush would never come into office let alone be able to send young men as cannon fodder to war!!

The war against Iraq is pouring oil into the fire. Now the the Arab World is starting to go against the West. If Mr Bush thinks he can "liberate" Iraq the way he thinks then he should think again. Even Tony Blair seems to slowly be coming to his "senses" and is now trying to negotiate with Bush.

Obviously the Alliance underestimated the Iraqi people (they are not feeling liberated )and the desert itself. So I am afraid this war will have many more casualities both civilians and military. This whole mess has become part of all our lives. Businesses are breaking down, the stockmarkets are at their lowest and the general mood of many people is of depression,especially those of my generation. I myself sleep very little these days.

Finally Mr.Shaughnessy I thank you once again for this forum. I have discovered that many emotions have come to light. Mine usually do this like now at 2.30 am!! Last but not least Bravo for Michael Moore!! Here was one man who showed civil courage!! His complete speech was printed in our daily paper. Also Adrian Brody was very courageous for such a newcomer, at least he managed to "shut up" the orchester. My admiration to this young man. I do not generally see films like "The Pianist" but I shall do so now. May there be peace soon

from Ada in Argentina - Condolences . . .

Dear Mr. Shaughnessy:

A nonchalant attitude in front of the cruel battles it's impossible. I think that the government of U.S.A. must act now and take action for peace quickly cause is very difficult win the war without the death of a lot of soldiers, and innocent lifes. The real victims acts out their experiences with this terrible war when several contingent have left out the battle zone. Is very hard, sad and painful.Worst of all has lost pilots and soldiers killed and I seize the opportunity to send condolences from this place to all U.S's people that has lost a father, a son or a friend in this war in this eight days. THANK YOU FOR THIS PLACE RESERVED FOR OUR OPINIONS.

From David in France - Text from Paulo Coelho that was published in the French newspaper "Le monde" on 03/18/03 Thanks a million, President Bush, by Paulo Coelho. . .

Thanks to you, mighty leader. Thank you, George W. Bush. Thank you for showing everyone the danger Saddam Hussein represents. Maybe many of us had forgotten his use of chemical weapons against his own people, against the Kurds, against the people of Iran. Hussein is a bloodthirsty dictator, one of the most evident expressions of Evil today. But I have other reasons to thank you. In the beginning of 2003, you knew how to show the world many important things, and for this, you deserve my thankfulness.

Thus, remembering a poem I learnt as a kid, I want to say thank you.

Thank you for showing everyone that the Turkish people and their parliament don't sell themselves, even for $ 26 millions.

Thank you for revealing to the world the gigantic abyss that exists between the decisions the governments make, and the people's desires. To make it clear that Tony Blair and Jose Maria Aznar have no respect whatsoever for the people who elected them. Aznar is capable of ignoring that 90% of Spaniards are opposed to war, and Blair doesn't care the least bit about the biggest demonstration in England in the latest 30 years.

Thank you, because your perseverance has forced Tony Blair to go the the British Parliament with a fake file, written 10 years ago by a student, and present it as "irrefutable proofs". Thank you for making Colin Powell look ridiculous at the UN security counsil, by showing pictures that were publicly disputed by Hand Blix himself, the Inspector responsible for the disarmament of Iraq, a week later. Thank you, for your position earned the French Minister of Foreign Affairs, Dominique de Villepin, the honor of being applauded in plenary session, which, to the best of my knowledge, had only happened once in the history of the United Nations, after a speech by Nelson Mandela.

Thank you, because thanks to your efforts for the war, for the first time, the Arab nations, generally divided, have unanimously condemned an invasion, during the Cairo meeting during the last week of february.

Thank you, because thanks to your rhetoric, saying that the UNO had one chance to demonstrate its importance, even the most reluctant countries have finally taken position against an attack on Iraq.

Thank you for your foreign policy, that led the British minister of foreign affairs, Jack Straw, to declare that "a war may have moral justifications", at the beginning of the 21st century, and thus lose all his credibility. Thank you for trying to divide Europe which is struggling for its unification, this warning won't be ignored. Thank you for having accomplished what only few people have managed in one century: unite millions of people on every continent, who fight for the same idea, even though this idea is opposed to yours. Thank you for making us feel that our words, even though they're not listened to, are at least spoken. This will give us more strength in the future. Thank you for ignoring us, for putting aside all those who have taken position against your decision, for the future of the Earth belongs to the outcast.

Thank you because without you, we wouldn't have known our capacity of mobilization. Maybe it won't be of any help today, but we will surely have use of it later. Now that the drums of war seem to resound irreversibly, I want to make mine the words a European King once said to an invader: "May this morning be beautiful for you, may the sun shine on your soldiers' armors, for this afternoon, I will defeat you."

Thank you for allowing us all, anonymous armies who wander through the streets to try and stop a process that has already started, to discover what is the feeling of helpnessness, to learn to fight it and transform it. Enjoy the morning, and what glory it can still bring you. Thank you, for you haven't listened to us, and you haven't taken us seriously. Know that we are listening to you, and that we will not forget your words.

Thank you, mighty leader George W. Bush. Thank you very much

Paulo Coelho is a writer. Translated from Portugese (Brasil) into French by Fran?oise Marchand Sauvagnargues, then in English by David from France, ?Paulo Coelho

From J in California - What a Surprise. . .

Here in the United States, our stock market is pretty much in the toilet, so many of my friends and family are losing their homes, can't pay their rent, losing their businesses or just plain don't have jobs & i know it isn't just in my circle of friends. Our economy is dreadful, the problems that we have in the United States are unprecedented . . .BUT i just heard that one of the post war build Iraq back up and save those oil field contracts went to, what a surprise. . . Dick Cheney's (former CEO of and now vice-president of the USA) Halliburton !!

The President asked Congress for $489.3 million to cover the cost of repairing damage to Iraq's oil facilities, much or all of which could go to Halliburton or its subcontractors under the terms of its contract with the Army. Halliburton said it has subcontracted the firefighting portion of the Army contract to Houston-based companies.

Here's an idea. Let's NOT give everything to Halliburton. Let's spread the wealth and offer every out of work construction worker in ALL of the United States an opportunity to get work on those jobs! I wonder if any British companies have been allowed to bid on post war Iraq contracts. Surely they should be allowed to "share the wealth" and not just the fighting.

Last month, President Bush signed legislation intended to punish corporate wrongdoers and toughen oversight of the accounting industry after the Enron and WorldCom scandals. The SEC is also investigating the accounting practices at Halliburton and Judicial Watch has filed a lawsuit accusing Halliburton of fraudulent accounting and is investigating its involvement with Iran. Cheney and several members of Halliburton's board of directors and executive management are named as defendants.

President Bush defended Cheney last month, saying he did nothing wrong, and that the Halliburton probe "will run its course." Wonder what that means? Let's hope it doesn't mean that no one will pay much attention to it anymore, because we are so focused on the war.

From Suzy in Missouri - Sanctions. . .

OK on the subject of Sanctions. 12 years of sanctions against Saddam Hussein have had no effect on him only an appalling effect on the people he rules. 12 years of waiting for him to disarm. 12 years of inspectors in and out (mostly out) of Iraq. How long is to long. You are a well read man and I am sure you have heard this before. If you put a frog in boiling water it will jump out, but if you put it in cool water and slowly turn up the heat it will soon boil to death. How hot is the water now after 12 years?

12 years ago I had a little girl just days before the 1st Gulf War. I also had 2 nephews 6 and 3. My brother in law mentioned one time that he wanted to enlist to take Saddam out of the picture so his sons wouldn't have to go to war. I thought he was stupid the UN would make Saddam face the "music" and comply with the disarming and with the inspectors. Now I feel stupid as his sons are old enough to be in the amy fighting. And as for my daughter she has grown to be beautiful and let me tell you the water is getting really hot around our house. I am by nature a funny person (well I think so). Always finding the wrong thing to say at the right time to bring a smile at the funeral or birthday but I cant find anything funny about any of this. Just my own thought. Keep this going I think it is a great forum.

From Allison from Florida - Soapbox. . .

I wanted to let you know how much I appreciate your opinions and thoughts on the Iraq war. I really admire celebrities who are willing to voice their opinions on the different issues that this country faces. Especially right now with the war going on. Thanks again for sharing your thoughts.

From Ryanne in Minnesota - History Books. . .

Dear Charlie,

If "the president" wants to get his name in the history books, why not do it by being a man who promotes peace rather than war? It may be a bit harder to do but in the long run the people of the world will respect him much more and will be much better off for it. Just a thought.

From Kayla from Alabama - Soapbox Response. . .

Good evening, Mr. Shaughnessy,

I am writing this in regards to your soapboxes on the war in Iraq. I fully support you in your opinions. I have some of the same opinions myself. In fact, I am currently deliberating whether or not to stage a walk-out for peace at my high school. This sentence is directed to Mary Ann from Cleveland: THE MARSHALL PLAN is, in fact, three words. I believe there is a song (besides, of course, all those annoying country songs) that asks many important questions about our time. The song is Mariah Carey's "Theres Got to be a Way" It is about peace. I really can't express in words how much I agree with you, Mr. Shaughnessy, so I guess I'll have to end this reply. Thank you for expressing the beliefs of all of us who don't have a soapbox. In the words of Fran Drescher, Think Peace.

From Stephane in France - The lesson of history. . .

455... This is the number of years France has been at war since the 14th century. During the latest centuries alone, France has been at war during 45 years, including 29 years of decolonization wars. The French casualties during all these wars are more than 4 230 000 people. This includes 1 550 000 during the Napoleonic wars, 1 600 000 during World War I, 550 000 during World War II (including 330 000 civilians), and 87 000 in Vietnam. At the same time, the Ameican casualties were 617 000 during the American Civil War, 117 000 during World War I, 291 000 during World War II, 38 000 in Korea and 58 000 in Vietnam, and very few civilians during these wars.

With its past history, France knows war very well. The French are not cowards who refuse to fight when they need. The French troops fought during both World Wars, then in Korea, Vietnam, Algeria, and more recently the first Gulf War, Rwanda, Bosnia, and Kosovo. But we don't see war only on CNN. We know how it is to suffer bombings, and so do the Germans. How many civilians were killed during 9/11? About 4000? During WWII, 67 078 French citizens were killed by Allied bombs. With ONE bombing on Dresde, Germany (13/14-2 1945), the Anglo-American bombers killed 135 000 people. I don't want to keep score and say the American people have not suffered from this terrorist attack. I just want to highlight theyr are not the only ones to know how it is to see innocent people die.

Perhaps the European history help us to grow, perhaps we have gain some wisdom. It's true Saddam Hussein is a dictator. A dangerous one for his own people. But who can decide to remove him? Does one man alone has the right to change an other head of state? Can the American go in Iraq and bring democracy there? Well, during about 4 centuries, from circa 1500 to 1900, other countries tried that. At the time, in was not to bring democracy, as it didn't really existed. No, back then it was called civilization. "Let's bring civilization (and God!) to these savages". France did the same with Algeria, and invade it in 1830, to put an end to the barbaresque piracy, which has been a nuisance for centuries. And France left Algeria 130 years after, with a bloody war. The same result happened almost every where. The colonization to bring civilization failed. Because people did not want to get foreign civilization, they want to forge their own. It's the same with democracy : people do not want a foreign democracy, they want to forge their own. The Revolutionnary France made this mistake 200 years ago, and thought it could export its democracy into Europe. They failed. It will probably be the same with America : the Iraqi fought the British colonization, they will fight the American colonization. The Bush administration may claim their goal is not to colonize, but I doubt it will be the point of view of the Iraqi people. If someone has any doubt, I suggest booking a plane ticket for Kabul, and going in the streets. Speaking to the people and asking them their feeling about their American "saviors".

I don't know what to think about this administration. Richard Pearl, advisor to Donald Rumsfeld spoke on the radio the other day. He said a few millions people demonstrating against the war is irrelevent, because it's only 0.5 % of the world population. Is he really stupid, or does he think we are that stupid? How many people demonstrate FOR the war? I don't kow if the Bush administration hide what they think, and think the American people is naive and will believe everything, of if they really believe what they think. Any way, I hope the American people will see the truth, and the danger of this administration decision, and will sanction it during the next election. The Bush administration claim the diplomatic discussion failed only because of France. How convenient. They knew they couldn't convince the Security Council, and that they will never have more votes than the 4 of USA, UK, Spain and Bulgaria. So they decide to avoid the fight of idea, so the American people could not see their defeat. If they were so sure of their right, they could have asked for the vote. Even if France had opposed a veto, at least Bush could have said "I have not an official UNO support because of France, but at least I have a majority of countries with me". But well, Bush is used to making decisions without a majority to support him, isn't he?

Already the Bush administration has opened the Pandora box . Turskish troops should enter Northern Iraq, against American request not to do so. But on what ground the Americans could ask Turkey not to invade a foreign country, to protect what the Turkish government sees as Turkish interest? Because Turkey is lacking UNO endorsment perhaps? By giving a clear example to the world that a country could invade another to settle a dispute if it thinks it has the power to do so, perhaps the Bush administration has thrown the seeds of a war about Kashmir between Pakistan and India (two countries with nuclear weapons), or of a Chinese invasion of Taiwan.

For weeks, Bush's team has kept pestering the UNO for a new resolution authorizing the use of force to disarm Iraq. But when it failed, what were the terms of the ultimatum? To disarm completly in 48 hours? No! Saddam Hussein must leave! And then some American offcials claim France has changed the rules of the game after the first resolution ?? So, now the US army is going to remove the terrible threat to the world that is the Iraqi arsenal. An arsenal that is so powerfull that the allies had 2 casualties in fighting so far. And 19 in crashes... I'm not afraid of Iraq. There are other countries and other dangerous men. And no, North Korea isn't that dangerous either, I personnally think they are more trying a blackmail to negotiate new help than something else. But there is someone else. Someone who lies to his own people and to the world. Someone whose police forces arrest "dissident" people who show a different opinion from the official one. Someone who doesn't respect international laws, ignore the UNO, negociate billateral treaties with countries to avoid trial before the new International Court of Justice. Someone who has far more nuclear warheads than North Korea, who has unopposed military might to enforce his narrowminded opinion. Someone who tries to fight muslim fundamentalism, when his speech shows clear sign of another kind of fundamentalism. Someone who doesn't want friends or allies, but minions and lackeys. Someone who lives in a big white house...

Someone who is currently the most dangerous man in the world, because he's definitely wrong and nothing can stop him. Nothing but a power than is supposed to be stronger than himself : the will of his own people. I'm afraid it is too late to stop his current course of action. But let's hope he will be stopped in 2004, and a wiser man will take over his duties, and manage to clean all the mess and repair the damages this someone will have done to the world.

From Liane in Germany -Horror of War. . .

Mr.Shaughnessy!

What I have feared has come true!It is Friday and the attacks on Bagdad have been going on for two days,and as a German TV commentator said the bombing always starts during Prime Time TV !! However since CNN reporters have been expelled from Bagdad we can now expect a more objective reports from Iraq. It was reported for instance that in certain areas reporters who don't belong to the pro war countries are rufused any information by the military as the US army apparently controls all press centers! As I live here in Germany we are getting very objective coverage of this horrific war. Even the BBC is trying to be objective which I can't say of CNN It appears there is an European coverage and an US, as at times the announcement comes "we are now switching to CNN America! So obviously the news is adapted to Bush propaganda! As I see the pictures on TV,very bad memories come back to me, and many my generation feel the same. The only difference to WWII is that the bombs have become bigger and more destructive but the sirens that announce them are the same, and that is one sound I have never forgotten to this day and shudder every time I hear one.

Today Sir Peter Ustinov and Harry Belafonte who are both UNICEF Ambassadors appealed to the US to stop this useless war as as usual it is the children who suffer most.

I wish I had a digital camera so I could send you pictures from the protests in Berlin in front of the US Embassy. At least here no one is being arrested voicing their opinion let alone for wearing a T-shirt with "peace" on it. Just to remind every one, after Sept.11th this same area was full of flowers and messages of condolence.

In the meantime there have been deaths on the front and maybe even wounded (propaganda wouldn't probalbly admit that at present)and I feel deeply for the families of these young men. They leave behind mothers, wives, brothers and sisters. I think what is going on in Iraq at present a crime against humanity. Where are Saddam's weapons of mass destruction? If he had any why hasn't he used them or is he just waiting for the right time? Then God help us all!

Finally, I want to repeat there is no anti americanism here, especially older Germans remember the help they received through the US after WWII. Today I spoke to some US exchange students and asked how they feel and if they have had any negative experiences. The answer was no, on the contrary they feel welcome and are impressed over the way way this whole issue of war is being discussed and most times very objective. Let us hope this inferno (which for me it now has become)ends soon. Thank you once again for this forum Mr. Shaughnessy. Liane (Aussie in Germany)

From Marina in Texas - Incredible Speech made by US Senator Robert C. Byrd. . .

Mr. Shaughnessy:

With my fiancee over in the Gulf, I have been a little distracted with all of this, somewhat fanatical. A very wise political man gave a great speech in the Senate on March 19, 2003. Very moving. Thought I would share it.

"As long as there is a forum in which questions can be asked by men and women who do not stand in awe of a chief executive and one can speak as long as one's feet will allow one to stand, the liberties of the American people will be secure." Senator Robert C. Byrd

March 19, 2003 Senate Remarks: The Arrogance of Power

I believe in this beautiful country. I have studied its roots and gloried in the wisdom of its magnificent Constitution. I have marveled at the wisdom of its founders and framers. Generation after generation of Americans has understood the lofty ideals that underlie our great Republic. I have been inspired by the story of their sacrifice and their strength. But, today I weep for my country. I have watched the events of recent months with a heavy, heavy heart. No more is the image of America one of strong, yet benevolent peacekeeper.

The image of America has changed. Around the globe, our friends mistrust us, our word is disputed, our intentions are questioned. Instead of reasoning with those with whom we disagree, we demand obedience or threaten recrimination. Instead of isolating Saddam Hussein, we seem to have isolated ourselves. We proclaim a new doctrine of preemption which is understood by few and feared by many. We say that the United States has the right to turn its firepower on any corner of the globe which might be suspect in the war on terrorism. We assert that right without the sanction of any international body. As a result, the world has become a much more dangerous place. We flaunt our superpower status with arrogance. We treat UN Security Council members like ingrates who offend our princely dignity by lifting their heads from the carpet. Valuable alliances are split.

After war has ended, the United States will have to rebuild much more than the country of Iraq. We will have to rebuild America's image around the globe.The case this Administration tries to make to justify its fixation with war is tainted by charges of falsified documents and circumstantial evidence. We cannot convince the world of the necessity of this war for one simple reason. This is a war of choice.

There is no credible information to connect Saddam Hussein to 9/11. The twin towers fell because a world-wide terrorist group, Al Qaeda, with cells in over 60 nations, struck at our wealth and our influence by turning our own planes into missiles, one of which would likely have slammed into the dome of this beautiful Capitol except for the brave sacrifice of the passengers on board. The brutality seen on September 11th and in other terrorist attacks we have witnessed around the globe are the violent and desperate efforts by extremists to stop the daily encroachment of western values upon their cultures. That is what we fight. It is a force not confined to borders. It is a shadowy entity with many faces, many names, and many addresses.

But, this Administration has directed all of the anger, fear, and grief which emerged from the ashes of the twin towers and the twisted metal of the Pentagon towards a tangible villain, one we can see and hate and attack. And villain he is. But, he is the wrong villain. And this is the wrong war. If we attack Saddam Hussein, we will probably drive him from power. But, the zeal of our friends to assist our global war on terrorism may have already taken flight. The general unease surrounding this war is not just due to "orange alert." There is a pervasive sense of rush and risk and too many questions unanswered. How long will we be in Iraq? What will be the cost? What is the ultimate mission? How great is the danger at home?

A pall has fallen over the Senate Chamber. We avoid our solemn duty to debate the one topic on the minds of all Americans, even while scores of thousands of our sons and daughters faithfully do their duty in Iraq. What is happening to this country? When did we become a nation which ignores and berates our friends? When did we decide to risk undermining international order by adopting a radical and doctrinaire approach to using our awesome military might? How can we abandon diplomatic efforts when the turmoil in the world cries out for diplomacy? Why can this President not seem to see that America's true power lies not in its will to intimidate, but in its ability to inspire?

War appears inevitable. But, I continue to hope that the cloud will lift. Perhaps Saddam will yet turn tail and run. Perhaps reason will somehow still prevail. I along with millions of Americans will pray for the safety of our troops, for the innocent civilians in Iraq, and for the security of our homeland. May God continue to bless the United States of America in the troubled days ahead, and may we somehow recapture the vision which for the present eludes us.

From Ada in Argentina - Continuation. . .

DISCULPAS...!!!Por error envie el mensaje sin firma ni conclusion. En resumen, quiero decir que el mundo entero se ha envuelto en esta guerra seamos o no protagonistas, estamos en ella y nos debe doler. Las bajas de ambos lados son dolorosas, el objetivo es poco claro y terrible, los tiempos en los que estamos no merecer?an una vida as?, como esta que proponen los grandes l?deres y los perturbados dictadores como HUSSEIN.Pido disculpas por escribir en mi idioma pero es que realmente ten?a prisa por expresarle que UD. NO DEBE DISCULPARSE ANTE NADIE POR PENSAR SENTIR Y OPINAR COMO L0 HACE, QUE TIENE MUCHA RAZON EN LO QUE EXPRESA Y QUE NUEVAMENTE DESEAR LA PAZ NO DEBERIA SER UNA UTOPIA A PESAR DE TODO.

From SD in Northern California - 19 march addendum. . . Charlie~

You and I have reached a meeting of the minds.? Pax Americana indeed!? I'm afraid we are now at that point in our historical time-line...where America has reached the cusp of its inevitable decline...but instead of barbarians and Goths, we must look to the invasion of elusive terrorists and our own internal self-destruction.? I too am terrified just where this final step into political insanity will take us.?The only thing I'm sure about is that we will never be the same nation again.? My heart is bleeding...not for Hussein or the Iraqis...but for us.? I will still hold to the view that the United States should pull completely out of European, Asian, and Middle Eastern affairs yet maintain a strong defensive position should there be a need.? Yes...I know it's a naive?pipedream.?

*A?little side note about the celebrity issue...I certainly can appreciate Abby's POV. Celebrities most assuredly have a financial agenda/incentive when it comes to increasing their popularity and public profile, no matter what the issue.?The main reason I?take your comments into consideration, is because you are a man of sense and education.?I respect your opinion, though in many points I'll agree to disagree. Take care,

From Sam in New York - Just My Opinion. . .

With almost 70% of Iraq in poverty, I can't understand invading that poor country and potentially causing the death of innocent people. Those people suffer because of Sadam...he's the threat, not the Iraqi people. Bush is not an effective leader, I do not respect or agree with any of his impatient decisions to go to war. Had President Bush been an effective leader, he would've gotten more support from the UN and world leaders alike. In the press conference Sunday with Tony Blair, Bush came across as cocky, short-tempered, and a man that is highly unsure of what he's saying. If his speech last night and his war, which will begin tomorrow, causes more violent attacks here at home...I will personally blame him.

And one more thing, if anyone saw Tom Ridge's press conference this morning about the threat level being raised to orange again...I was a little annoyed at the end of his speech when he seemed to smirk a bit and almost giggle at the idea of "don't listen to rumors". Obviously...but it's more assuring during these times to have people working for a president who hold themselves up as dignified and respectful.

I'm sorry if I offend anyone. As a person who is very much against violence of any kind, I'm just very emotional and frightened right now. I wholeheartedly support the brave men and women in our armed forces. They pretty much volunteered to serve for careers, education, and the ultimate importance of protecting those of us who live as free as we do here at home. That makes it more emotional for me to not have faith and confidence in this man that was appointed President by a court of conservative Republican justices.

I just hope the conflict, as it has been decided, will play out fast, minimal lives will be lost, and an oppressed nation of good people will be somewhat liberated. I have friends from Iraq that I always think of during all this.

The world is big, people are different, lives are different, cultures are different... The preferred way of life is not about being "white, American, privileged, and wealthy"! These are trying times for all of us. My comments about the war here on will be referring to thoughts and well wishes of our service men and women.

This morning I went to have coffee and read the paper at Starbucks. My good friend was getting ready to secure medflight units on the Iraqi border. I have much to be greatful for, I know. Peace and love to all

From Dimphy in Holland - :). . .

So let me get this straight: somebody was actually arrested for wearing a Peace? T-Shirt? So he was just wearing this T-Shirt and not doing anything else like protesting or something?? Because then it's kinda stupid.

Anyway, if this man would have been a celebrity then it wouldn't have been more or less justified then any other. Celebrity's are still humans and they have to listen to the laws like any other person. In NO way can be said celebritys are free from laws or rules or anything like that. No matter how succesfull they may be, they're no different from any other person!! But I keep saying that celebritys have great influence on people and I will continue saying that again and again and again. For instance, Charlie, you started this discussion and see how many people already have responded!! I'm sure if I would have done the exact same thing on my own website I wouldn't be able to get half as many responds as you have. When you're famous, people choose to be your fan. And for a fan nothing feels better then actually have some contact with their hero, just like you and I are doing right now. So when you as a celebrity write down your opinion over a subject like this and you ask your fans to respond, they surely will respond, and when they respond they think about the subject. So basicly, you made a young girl, almost 17 years old (ME), think about the war in Iraq, because you asked me too, because you took your time to write down your feelings about it and you wanted your fans to respond.

Well, as for me, I'm still glad to hear that the Netherlands have chosen only to be political involved instead of military involvement but I pray for all those soldiers in Iraq. They receive my deepest respect and I support each and every one of them. I just hope this'll all end soon and then we will be continue to live our lives as we always have.

From Marina in Texas - Civil Liberties Will Suffer. . .

The consequences of the war launched by the United States and Britain against Saddam Hussein's Iraq will be extremely wide-ranging. Far, far down on the US's list of worries will be the consequences of war to our constitutional liberties at home. (Welcome to Bush's "home of the free" where a man can get arrested in a mall for wearing a T-shirt that reads, "Give Peace a Chance") We should be worried about the fate of our civil rights and liberties.

Inter arma silent leges -- A Latin Maxim that describes the problem we will be facing = In time of war the laws are silent.

Constitutional scholars, however, can be forgiven (just for a few days) if they're somewhat more concerned about the massacre abroad. In the short term, the launch of war will turn Iraq into a kind of international media black hole - irresistibly sucking all media attention into itself, and leaving almost no room to report on local places, events, violations of civil liberties, and law enforcement abuse. It is, in other words, a priceless opportunity for any authoritarian-minded politician and law enforcement agencies (i.e., Homeland Security) with scores to settle to get nasty.

In the legal community, where the struggle for public opinion and change has been so hard fought, this is a particular cause for concern. Bush's administration clearly has a hefty backlog of autocratic measures it's chomping at the bit to implement. Until now, concern with preserving a fa?ade of democratic legality has served as a brake for those impulses. I think we should all be worried that the government will take advantage of the kind of free-pass from public opinion the war will afford it. The temptation, I'm afraid, could prove hard to resist. The supremacy of security over liberty that typically accompanies national emergencies will allow this government to restrict Americans' civil liberties. Be forever watchful that the government may try to sacrifice our liberty for security. Even temporarily, this should and must be an unacceptable trade.

Take the long-feared move to shut down and restrict our freedom of speech and association. Under normal circumstances, such a decision would cause a huge outcry in the public media. But in the warped media universe of war, politicians and law enforcement personnel may conclude that the outrage will be relegated to the inside pages of the metro sections of your local newspapers. Possibly, it will get a complete free pass on The New York Times, CNN and the BBC - at worst, it will cause only minor ripples. This could persuade them that the political cost of taking such decisions is low enough that it's in the government's interest to go forward.

It's not just that a 60 year old man was arrested at a mall for wearing a peace T-shirt that is cause for concern here: sure, the court has quashed the arrest warrant against him and has dropped all charges, but there was no reason for him to have been arrested to begin with. Who will object to such brutality while American troops shoot it with the Special Republican Guard in the streets of Baghdad? And if that's true for older men wearing peace shirts in malls, it's no less true for any number of other members of society, including your children that law enforcement would dearly like out of its hair.

BEWARE OF CONGRESS: They are deliberating a sweeping set of proposals from the Bush administration that would increase wiretapping of phones and the Internet, boost police authority to detain individuals, and rewrite immigration laws.

At this point, the US is betting on a quick and decisive victory in Iraq, with little post-war instability in the country or its neighbors. If this scenario does pan out, it's likely the media black hole caused by the war would be relatively short-lived, and the Americans might resume their role as critical observer of human civil liberties within a reasonably brief period of time. But if the war bogs down somehow, if the US and Britain suffer any serious reverses, if casualties start to mount either among US and British soldiers or Iraqi civilians, then the vortex could extend substantially in time, giving the Bush administration a protracted period of political cover to pursue its autocratic agenda. It will be a terrible scenario for civil rights here as well as in the world. I hope this email finds everyone well and safe.

From Stephanie in Texas - Once again, I agree. . .

I was surprised to see my last response on your website, honestly, I wasn't sure you'd actually had time to read all the responses, when I did I was glad to see that you took the time, I kept it short, and wish I hadn't, boy, others certainly weren't shy. Thank you Mr. Shaughnessy. Now that America has taken action, I can't help but feel that President Bush, in my opinion, will risk so much, including the economy, (since it has been the worst since the late 80's), because of something personal and political. So many of us here have been hurt very badly by the ecomony, my husband included, luckily after a year, he has been able to change careers. Of course this monster in Iraq and others should be stopped, no doubt about it and I don't think that anyone would disagree on that, but, I feel by doing this, America looks imperialistic, and like you said, what and who next? As my husband and I expect our first child in October, of course right now, it is even more disturbing to me. As I stay home on bedrest, I watch the news quite a bit, and basically get fiery when the President does a news conference.

As far as actors using a website as a debate, really, what is the big deal? I don't get it. What does that have to do with anything, and I can't believe anyone should care how or where we as American Citizens discuss ANY issue. Well Mr. Shaughnessy, I know you'd rather read the emails that debate or disagree with you, sorry, I really do agree. Thank you very much for your time.

From Sally in Georgia - It's Time To Unite. . .

I happened upon this website the day after President Bush announced that Hussein has 48 hours to get out of Bagdhad. I felt compelled to say just one thing. Regardless of your view of whether this war is right, it's time for the United States to unite. Saddam Hussein is a tyrannical dictator who deserves to be ousted. I appreciate the differences of opinion, and the fact we live in a country we can freely express those opinions. I truly believe President Bush and his administration has more and better information about what is going on in Iraq than we do. Those in the public eye through the entertainment industry have no better information the ordinary person who is not known outside his or her own community.

Though the circumstances in Iraq are not exactly like those of Hitler's Germany, it still involves a depression of human rights. It involves an evil dictator using his own people to protect himself and his position. And it involves a supporter of terrorism who despises the United States and other free countries because of their own religious intolerance and a greed for power.

I do not look forward to this war, but I understand the need for it. I want my children to live in a safe society when they grow up. I hate that they have to worry about terrorist attacks. I hate that they must experience war in their lifetime. But I would hate it more if they must deal with these issues with their children. Saddam Hussein will not go away without pressure. I an grateful for a president who is focused enough and courageous enough to deal with this now instead of passing the problem to the next generation.

God bless our troups. God bless our diverse society. God bless us all.

From Dimphy in Holland - Ok, so now I'm scared. . .

(first of all, I want to apoligize for my bad english) So it begins... Just last night I watched this speech that was given by president Bush about the current situation that is going on. As you all probably will know, he gave Saddam a simple choice: leave in 48 hours or face war!! And I'm sure Saddam wil NOT leave Iraq...

I feel sorry for all those American and British soldiers who probably will face death and everything...what drove this man...this..Bush...so far??

The question still remains: will Europe be attacked? Personally, I'm scared it will...since England is in this war too!! They're just as much a target for Saddam and Al Quida as the US are... It scared me to death when I found out the best way for Saddam to enter England, is to go through Holland to get there, since we got the great harbours and everything... (okay, so maybe I'm overreacting but still) We talked about it a lot today...even if Saddam will leave Europe alone, there will be little fights here and there...people who hold their faith in the Islam might want to stand up for their comrads in war back in Iraq... I fear the couple of weeks that have to come...

When I recall the past few weeks, something just hit me... For the last couple of days there have been some terrifying reports on the news: a new kind of pneumonia has become a threat to the world population...ceveral people in Asia and Africa have already died from this illness and nobody can tell exactly what this virus is or how it came here... It made me think: did this virus just appeared like that...or was it set loose...Everybody has been talking about dangerous chemical weapons...what's with this virus...? I may be crazy or something...I just found it weird and everything...is it an accident or not?

I realize that standing together as one is more then important right now!! That's why I treasure these forums so much and that's why I make sure to keep in touch every once in a while and give my opinion about it...I mean, if we wouldn't do it, then who would? I want to have a chance to get to know the man I'm gonna marry, I want to have a chance to raise the children I might have...I wanna have a chance to pursue my dream of becoming an actress... I want to fulfill my dreams and right now the world has reached a point where the chance of fulfilling my dreams is slowly but surely fading away...

We cannot let this happen but yet it is happening...and what power do we have, you may think!! Well, little...that's the harsh truth...The only thing we can do is have faith in ourselves and in everybody else on this planet...Only if we stand togheter, we can live through this...because friends are so important right now...no matter what he/she believes in... I just heard Saddam has thrown away the dead-line that Bush has given him. And Bush actually gained little respect from me...the people on the news said that Bush wanted this dead-line, to make sure that foreign people in Iraq would get enough time to leave...okay, so the man's not a monster after all...

Well, I wrote about enough for now... let us pray and God/Allah/Boeddha (whatever) bless the world...

From David in France- Just This song. . .

From an old French poet/singer, Boris Vian wrote it in 1954... It is called the Deserter, but it's definitely not an apology of cowardice...

Mister President I'm writing this letter to you That maybe you will read If you have time
I have just received My military papers To go to war Before wednesday evening.
Mister President, I don't want to do it I was not put on Earth To kill poor people
I don't want to make you angry I must tell you I have made my decision I am going to desert
Since I was born, I have seen my father die, I have seen my brothers go, And my children cry
My mother has suffered so much She is now in the tomb And doesn't care about the bombs And doesn't care about the verses
When I was a prisoner Someone stole my wife Someone stole my soul And all my dear past
Tomorrow morning, I will shut my door To the dead years' nose I will go on the roads
I will beg for my life On the roads of France From Britanny to Provence And I will tell the people:
Refuse to obey Refuse to do it Don't go to war Refuse to leave
If one has to shed one's blood Then go shed yours You are a good Apostle Mister President
If you go after me, Warn your troops That I will hold no weapons And that they can shoot...

President Bush is convinced that this war is necessary. History will remember that more than 5 millions of people around the world demonstrated against that war... "Democracy"?... Tell me, Mr. President, what does it mean?

The American and British troops do have my full support, as well as the people of Iraq. Now the world will have to face the consequences of Mister Bush's obsession...

From Fran in California - Global Candlelight Vigil . . .

"On Sunday evening people in every corner of the globe will shine beacons of light throughout the world. May our candles rekindle the light of reason and hope so that war will be averted in Iraq and peace will prevail in the world." - - - Archbishop Desmond Tutu

If you want to show your support for peace, I encourage you to go to the website http://www.globalvigil.org to learn about the Global Candlelight Vigil for Peace: Sunday, March 16 at 7:00 PM.

Archbishop Desmond Tutu, Reverend Robert Edgar, and other religious leaders call for candlelight vigils around the world on march 16th to say yes to peace -- and no to war with Iraq.

So far, over 4,000 vigils have been scheduled in 110 countries. It appears that the Bush administration will fail to win Security Council support for war, and world public opinion has been a key part of this. Help by attending, or scheduling, a candlelight vigil on Sunday in your area. MoveOn.org and the Win Without War coalition , together with Archbishop Desmond Tutu and many faith-based organizations, are calling for this global vigil.

Beginning in New Zealand, this will be a rolling wave of candlelight gatherings that will quickly cross the globe. It is the hope that thousands of small groups around the world will be inspired to come together and stand for peace. It's time for the world to come together in this moment of darkness and rekindle the light of reason and of hope to renew our commitment to building a positive world for our children.

This is a key moment in history. I urge you to be a part of it, the first candlelight vigil to sweep around the globe on the evening of March 16th, to lead the nations of the world away from an unnecessary war and toward a peaceful future. think peace. . .

From Mary Ann in Cleveland - no subject

Well, I guess all Brits don't hate president Bush. Did anyone catch SIMON COWELL'S comments on American Idol last night? He wanted to replace that Dixie Chick who opened who traitorous mouth with one of the contestants on last night's show. Classic!

From Susan in Texas - Keep Speaking Up Charles, You are right on target. . .

Your Soapbox comments (Feb 03) about the possibility of the US going to war were so right on target. Your perception is sharp, and your commentary benefits from?the vision of someone who has lived here for years, yet with the objectivity of someone who is not native-born.

? Everything you said, from the fact that this war has echoed what (most of) my friends, my family, and my colleagues have said.? From the inanity of the war, to the fact that we are playing right into Osama's hands, to the fact that we are marching off to war without full global support - is so true.? The fact that someone who lost the popular vote by nearly a half million votes thinks he has some sort of mandate - is sad and true. The fact that we are going to war to avenge a father's embarrassment is very much true. As an American, the sickening march to war is saddening to me, and as a Texan I find the Cowboy style of government to be both an embarrassment and an anathema.

? Charles, don't be silenced by the response you've gotten to your commentary. Actors have EVERY right (maybe responsibility, if they feel it) to speak up. Throughout history, from the times of the Greek tragedies through modern times, actors have been speaking the thoughts of those enlightened enough to write them, and to those enlightened enough to hear them. Anyone who thinks actors are wrong to speak on political matters?have not read Shakespeare! If they can't see the obvious references to imperialism, colonialism, class warfare, and more in the works of the Bard just doesn't have enough vision to see that actors have been speaking out since the profession began. ?

Don't be silenced by those who claim your words against war, therefore seem to?support a murderous tyrant like Saddam. They do not. The fact that some of my rather misguided native brethren think that Saddam's actions are equal to that of Nazi Germany is both sad, and sickening. There is?little valid?comparison. Rightfully, none of us here?is supporting Saddam - the man is a tyrant and a despot. Saddam is clearly a tumor on the world's body indeed - ?but that does not give us cause to 'crusade' into a battle with him because we don't agree with what he's said. ?

The irony is that our country was founded by individuals who put their lives on the line to ensure that Americans could live in peace from tyrants of every stripe. This country was conceived as a?place where?people could choose their own destiny - yet we feel this gives us a warrant to inflict our brand of freedom on those who do not want it themselves. Furthermore, I feel?that Americans' Founding Fathers?would cringe at seeing us now at the doorsteps of a war waged only because we can do it.? Sad indeed? that the murderers who planned the 9/11 attacks because they felt American imperialism needed to be stopped - are now handed previously nonexistent proof that we were guilty of it.

? PLEASE keep speaking your mind - I am lucky that I agree fully with your view. But even if I did not, I'd still support you having the right to continue to speak your mind, and I'd be grateful that you have a platform on which to do it. And since anyone who has come to your website to read your words has come VOLUNTARILY, then that reinforces the fact that there is a public who is interested in what you have to say. Continued success to you, Charles. Bravo!

From Kathy in Austria - Fear . . .

I'm 18 years old and quite naturally haven't earned any academical degree yet. And I have always loved acting, watching it as well as doing it myself. I don't know anybody involved in politics and therefore can't get any "insider information". The only insights, I have in political events, result from reading newspapers and watching TV.

As all of that shouldn't have any effect on my right to express my opinion on this whole situation in any way, I have the feeling I'm less qualified to do so than others, at least in the eyes of one person. Yes, Abby, I informed you of all this just to save you from reading another unimportant mail that comes from a person, whose opinion is most probably even more despicable than that of Mr. Shaughnessy.

In case you should be reading on nevertheless, I have another shocking announcement to make: I'm one of those fans, who find Charles Shaughnessy "oh so cute". And not only this - after reading his website I even consider him a rather sensible and open-minded man. And yet- just imagine!!- I don't believe his statements to hold the ultimate truth.

I only think, it's great, that he shares his thoughts this way, and I think, it's even greater that he also lets other people express their opinions here, whether they agree with him or not. That's not cowardly at all, but rather courageous of him. I mean- seven letters behind your name or not-, I just doubt, you think logically on this matter. Accusing a person of imposing his own opinion on others, when this very same person is just doing the opposite by encouraging people to write their disagreeing beliefs, is not, what I understand as well and rationally thought. Sorry,just my point of view.

I don't feel to be the one to judge, whether you or Mr. Shaughnessy or anybody else is right with his statements. I know, I can't. In fact nobody can, because there are too many tough and complex factors to be considered. But when thinking of Bush waging war on Iraq there is one one emotion overshadowing everything else: Fear. I don't really know, what Bush is aiming at by this war, even though I've really tried hard to understand. Yes, it could be that he wants to revenge for his father's nemesis, as Mr.Shaughnessy has suggested. But I don't think so. I can't believe that the President of the United States of America, whatever else opinion one might have about him, would let personal matters influence his political decisions, at least not mainly and not with the support of the rest of the government.

It could be, because he wants to demonstrate the power of the US, to show that he and the US is better than the rest of the world; it could be because of the oil; it could be because he wants to distract people's minds from domestic grievances in the US. I'm quite sure that several or all af these thoughts have crossed his mind and contributed to his seemingly apodictic decision in favour of war. But if his actions result only from any of these causes, why then I wonder, is it, that he is supported that vigorously by Tony Blair? So I have come to the conclusion that the two of them really have a goal in mind that just isn't understood by the rest of the world yet- or at least so they may think. Probably they really want to free the world of Saddam and his potential danger and democratize that region, which would -without any doubt- be a great benefit to the world.

But aren't the risks of war far too high? This is, where my fear sets in. I'm worried that Saddam and Iraq destroyed by the US - and also European military power will just give Islamic extremists the perfect reason to strike back - in the form of new terroristic attacks! It will ignite the fire of hatred in some people, who haven't been that opposed to the "civilized western world" up to now, and it will make it even blaze up higher in those, who have just waited for something like that. Arabic states that have cooperated with the USA so far, maybe will no longer do so, but also try to fight - and only God knows, what kind of scenario this might bring upon us. As far as I know, Pakistan for instance is in possession of nuclear weapons. What if some madman suddenly gets it into his hands? The situation is quite similar with Iran, even thouth they don't have nuclear weapons at their disposal (yet).

Maybe I'm seeing things a bit too dramatic, but I don't really see the reason, why to take a chance on all this. We all can do without finding out the truth about this, I think. It's just not right to wage war on a nation situated in a region that kind of instabile, above all as Saddam hasn't even threatened the US or any other country recently and no convincing proof has been given so far, that he is in any way connected to Osama Bin Laden - who will be very delighted by the turn of events after March,17th, by the way. On the other hand North Korea, that has been constantly provoking the US lately, is practically left unnoticed, while all focus is set on Iraq.

I personally don't see a sense behind these things, and really do hope that Bush and Co do and know, what they are doing. That's because I would be really thankful, if all of my fears would never become reality.

PS: Thank you very much for this soapbox, Mr. Shaughnessy. It's great to hear your opinions and to get a look at all those different views from people all over the world. Thanks for reading. And keep up the good work!!

From David in France - In response to some posts. . .

Yesterday, President Jacques Chirac spoke on the French National Television. Among many other things, he reminded us of the current resolution 1441, which leads to so many heated debates at the UN Security Council, and which basically is: disarm Iraq. So far, Mr. Blix? reports show that the inspectors are making slow but regular progress and that even if they do it reluctantly, the Iraqi officials cooperate.

Who are we to doubt the UN inspectors reports?. . . I mean they're the ones that are the most informed of the actual situation (oh sorry, I forgot the American satellites (I'll speak of them later), why won't we let them do their jobs and IF they meet SERIOUS problems, THEN decide what to do, and possibly use weapons to achieve this goal.

If we take the resolution textually, then I don't see why the US stomp their foot irritably to get the approval of the International Community and attack Iraq, for weapons have been destroyed in Iraq - so far - and in that state of mind, I think Mr. Bush has ALREADY won: Iraq IS - once again - destroying its missiles, Iraq shows a degree of collaboration, that even though not entirely satisfactory yet, would never have been achieved if there weren't about 300,000 soldiers at its borders.

Yes, it's taking time. But if we can achieve that goal without a war and all the horrors that come with it, then time is a low price to pay. Don't misunderstand, France is definitely not a pacifist country, but war is always an ultimate solution, and already a great failure.

Now let's consider the problem differently. In an alternate universe, the UN say: we want to rid the world of Saddam Hussein. WOW! That's a totally different problem! Yes, it's completely different, but I don't think Mr. Bush and Co. wouldhave to face such an opposition from so many countries, because then, evenmost of the Muslim countries would agree.

Semantics? Indeed, but it has the merit of being honest. People stressed out that the reason why France and Russia were so reluctant to support a war against Iraq was because they held the Iraqi Petroleum. True. But,

1 - who do you think will get a hold of the Iraqi petroleum if there's an unilateral attack from The US and Great Britain?

2 - I speak for France - the main reason is not Petroleum. It is one of the reasons, no doubt, we do have economical interests there, but did anyone from Mr. Bush's administration, or Mr. Blair's administration think of the inevitable consequences of such a war? I'm not sure they thought of everything. No expert in the world can accurately predict what the consequences will be, they only know that they will have long term effects, and that some might be terrible. And I'm not speaking of the Humanitarian condition of Iraq, which compared to those consequences, would be "secondary" - so to speak.

The Iraqi people have lived for about 30 years under a repressive dictatorship, what kind of freedom of thinking do you think they have? Let alone freedom of speech. Their only concern right now is how they're going to fill their plate for the day, and how they're going to get medicine for the old man who is dying of dysentery. Of course they need our help, but they certainly don't need another war.

Satellites now, Do you know how easy it is to insert a missile battery on a digital photo? There was an interesting report about that the other day. The French also have satellites taking pictures of every Iraqi square inch, and amazingly enough the pictures are not exactly the same (although they should be) as the American ones. Who's lying/spewing misinformation? The French or the American government? I honestly have no idea, but some of us are - somehow - manipulated. Could it be the side of "those who are too weak to think for themselves, too lazy to find out the truth, or too cowardly to stick up for what is right" ? Then the number of mistaken people is enormous, and we sure need the American people to show us the truth.

I'm asking the same questions again: who is manipulated? Has anyone thought of the consequences?

Some on this board have gone calling names people who did not share their opinion, brandishing their warrior sword. I notice that the same people have been quite vindictive, although the accused ones have been quite diplomatic. There's something the cops use to impress gangsters: they shout, they make a lot of noise, they try to impress, to lead the gangsters minds to submission. I don't think calling people names is needed here. This is an open board where everybody is entitled to confront his/her opinion without being scorned for that.

Some said that no one should be entitled to hold any political soapbox. Is that "freedom of speech"? I heard that some pacifist American Women were arrested because they dared demonstrating in front of the white house! I didn't know the US had become a repressive country, I thought they were the country of freedom, I thought they claimed it enough in the declaration of Human Rights.

Mr. Bush says that he's on a mission from God, or that his Faith in God leads him to do what he thinks is right. Might I remind him and whoever believes him, of the 6th commandment: "You shall not murder." Peace - David, France.

From Roman Carlos Aguilera in Argentina - guerra y otros temas (war and other subjects). . .

Estimado Mr. Charles Shaughnessy:

Mi esposa me coment? sobre este apartado donde la mayor?a de la gente se expresa acerca de la guerra y yo tambi?n lo le? porque estos asuntos me interesan bastante. Provenimos de Argentina, un pa?s donde no es f?cil la vida, ni ser feliz, con los sobresaltos a que nos tienen acostumbrados los muy malos pol?ticos que nos gobiernan, escribo pues desde un pa?s donde hablar y opinar estuvo por a?os prohibido, expresarse art?sticamente en contra de los militares fue por d?cadas causa de desapariciones y de muchos exilios. No entiendo que bregar por la paz en el mundo sea cosa de cobardes. Gracias a Dios en mi familia no hay ning?n desaparecido y entre mis amistades tampoco pero me duele la actitud tomada entonces de indiferencia ante el miedo que en realidad era cierto dejo de cobard?a, aqu? se ac??? una frase el famoso NO TE METAS y se silenciaron muchas injusticias. La Iglesia, las organizaciones de derechos humanos, muchas instituciones de laicos, callaron, ignoraron, en fin, no se metieron. Pero claro, reclamaron despu?s, con la llegada de la democracia, cosas que les dol?an a unos pocos, rasg?ndose las vestiduras como si realmente sintieran algo por muchos de los que murieron defendiendo un ideal. Los politicos de turno dictaron leyes de PUNTO FINAL y de OBEDIENCIA DEBIDA, para tender un manto de olvido sobre la ya fr?gil memoria de mi pueblo.

Ser actor y opinar estaba prohibido. Grandes actores de mi pa?s tuvieron que irse, como NORMA ALEANDRO que luego gan? un OSCAR por THE OFFICIAL STORY, un film que fue apenas un esbozo de nuestro drama, acompa?ada por otro grande de la pantalla: HECTOR ALTERIO.

Pas? mucha agua debajo del puente ahora arremete contra el pais una crisis econ?mica devastadora, con un eneorme desempleo, descontento genealizado y la huida por los techos de la CASA ROSADA sede del gobierno de uno de los mas ineptos presidentes que tuvimos en toda nuestra historia.

Esto viene a cuento porque por lo menos ustedes los actores que son seres pensantes, padres de familia, con sue?os y proyectos, se han detenido a pensar y se han convertido en voceros de gente que no puede decir NO A LA GUERRA sin ser aplastados por un sistema desigual.

Si tener la libertad de opinar es cobard?a, entonces d?nde est? la libertad.El presidente Bush no debe atreverse por estas horas y con millones en el mundo en contra, a tomar esa suicida decision que esperamos con tanta tensi?n y dolor en este mundo en el que parece mentira que en pleno siglo XXI y con tanta tecnologia a nuestro alrededor todav?a peleemos y nos matemos y algunos prefieran eso a disfrutar de todo ello en PAZ.

From Stephane in France - Iraq and the French Position. . .

Dear Charles, and everybody who is contributing here,

First, I would like to say I don't consider myself as a fan, and being a man the "cute" aspect leave me completly unimpressed (no offense!). I do watch the Nanny with my wife during our evening meals, but I didn't came here because of your acting performances. In fact, my wife simply transfered to me a copy of the soapbox, and I found the contents interesting. So I decided to post some of my thougths, as it seems a place were people could share their feelings, and try to see things from different points of view.

Cowardice. . . The French haven't sent any troops on Iraqi border. Is it out of cowardice? No. The French do send troops when the French government think it's necessary. The US are not the only peacekeepers in the world. In fact, France is the country that contributes the most troops for UNO peace keeping mission. But in the present case, what is the situation? The scope of the current resolution, voted unanimously by the UNO security council (yes, that means even the US), is quite clear. This resolution ask Iraq to get rid of any mass destruction weapons it could have. To achieve this, it has been agreed that inspectors will go in Iraq to monitor this progress. If they say they cannot do their job as required, and if they say disarming Iraq this way is an impossible task, then Iraq would be disarmed by force. The French position is very clear on that: if Mr Blix states inspection won't succeed, then French troops will help. Because it will then be the only solution. But Mr Blix said it seems to be working, and he's confident Iraq could be totally disarmed in a matter of months. I am not a weapon expert. The French president is not either, and he recognized it without any shame. He has adviser who are experts, but they are not currently in Iraq, doing the inspections. Only the UNO inspectors have this double "asset" : being experts, and being on the field. So I think they are in the best position to give an opinion on the efficiency of the process.

Now the Americans want a new resolution, which will automatically allow the use of force if Iraq doesn't completly disarm within a few days. First, if they indeed had such weapons, I strongly doubt they could destroy them in such a short time. This would require at least weeks. Or do the people who buy gas mask for their home things chemical/bacteriological weapons could simply be destroyed by a guy with a big hammer? Second, if they don't have weapons, they can't destroy them, and so can't comply with US requirement to do so. In effect, this new resolution means "We want to invade Iraq and don't really have a good reason to do so, but we need UN endorsment because our people do not support us as well as we hoped". The danger of Iraq is not so great as some would like to make the US people believe. Ah, I forget. Their infamous missile with an excessive range. 30 km more than allowed. How many are still missing to reach the USA? More than 8000 I think.

Perhaps Bush is simply thinking if he withdraw his troops he will lose face. But he has already won, and winning a war without fighting is honorable. He has won because the US pressure is forcing Iraq to cooperate. But kicking a guy when he lies on the ground is not very honorable. Even if he's a bad guy.

When I think of the situation, a simple comparisson comes to my mind. Saddam his the guy who is driving to fast on the highways. The US army is the cop, clearly visible on the side of the street. When the driver see the cop, he respects the speed limitation. But of course, we all know he may try to accelerate as soon as the cop is out of sight. But what would you think of the cop if he simply shot the driver when he pass near him, at a reasonnable speed, because he may not respect the limitation in the future? To me, the solution is a constant resolve of the cop to watch and be ready, not to act preventively.

I don't remimber any hint for Mister Powell of anyone else that the US will ask a resolution stating the democracies will invade Iraq to install a new government there and remove Saddam Hussein on the ground he is a dictator. Why don't they do so if it is their main concern as they claim? Do they fear something? Who is speaking of cowardice then? People who oppose a war that has no clear reason to occur? Or people who don't want to share the reasons they want to fight with an International representation? Or perhaps it's because saying to UNO "Well, we simply want to take their oil" may seems a bit unfriendly to some. I'm sure the vice president former company, which has been contacted to participate in the rebuild phase during after wars doesn't find this so unfriendly.

Democracy cannot be imposed. "We the people of the United States, in order to form a more perfect union, establish justice, insure domestic tranquility, provide for the common defense, promote the general welfare, and secure the blessings of liberty to ourselves and our posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America." We the people... Democracy is governing by the people. Only the people of the country can do so. Iraq will be a democracy when the Iraqi people will be able to write a constitution that complies with their history, their religion, their culture, their customs and feelings.

Bush often said his faith in God he's helping him to reach his decision.

2nd commandment: THOU SHALT NOT TAKE THE NAME OF THE LORD THY GOD IN VAIN.
"Men use blasphemy to stress their point of action, thoughts and desires. ... Men very often swear against God to impress another man with their false strength. Men abuse the Name of God to eliminate having to face in a dignified way, truth. Also, when a man is suspicious of his own lack of integrity, stability, masculinity, he abuses God, for the cowardice within himself tells him he will not be struck down immediately."

5th commandment: THOU SHALT NOT KILL.
What about Iraqi civilians? How do they call them... colateral casualties?

8th commandment: THOU SHALT NOT BEAR FALSE WITNESS AGAINST THY NEIGHBOR.
We are still waiting for clear proof of Iraq mass weapon destruction (now, not 10 years ago, every knows they had weapons. The question is do they have some now)

10th commandment: THOU SHALT NOT COVET THY NEIGHBOR'S GOODS.
Does that include Iraq's oil?

I know I do not follow these commandment myself in my posts, but I did not claim it, and the sentence "In God we trust" is not written near the picture of some of my predecessor on millions on small green sheets of paper.

From Rose in Maryland -Keep Soapboxing!. . .

Dear Charlie,

Congratulations on the website and for speaking your mind. You're right--that's what this country is all about!

Last night, Jessica Lange appeared on "The Late Show with David Letterman" (guest-hosted by Whoopi Goldberg). Although she appeared very nervous (she said it was her first time on the show), she was very articulate and stated her beliefs convincingly. I appreciated what she did at the U.N. that morning but you sure could have cut the silence from last night's audience with a knife. I wish more people would come out and say that to be anti-war is *not* being anti-American.

Those are a few of my thoughts on a busy Tuesday afternoon. Keep up the good work, Charlie!

From Theresa in Colorado- War in Iraq. .