At first glance it appeared that you were conveying the opposite of what your message is all about....way to use bold words to catch my eye...

--
Simplify

love the presentation of facts. I was origional drawn to it by the large "Fuck Iraq" that was readable in the thumb and wanted to see what the other message was. it proved to be an effective way to draw in people looking for a pro-war stance. not that I'm pro-war

LOVE it!

--

[Derek Van Oss.com] [interviewed] [interviewed 2]

Why don't you get the Fuck OUT of America!!

Good way to show one side of the argument. Nevermind that Israel violates U.N. resolutions in retaliation against palestinian suicide bombers. Nevermind that deaths in Iraq that are blamed on sanctions are in in fact because of it's dictator. Nevermind that if the U.S. hadn't used nuclear weapons in WWII, the war would have lasted years longer resulting in countless more deaths. Good Job.

--
Who doesn't love deathonabun?

:icondeathonabun:

[link]

too bad that almost all of your figures are incorrect and unfounded.

--
Roman Apparel

Interesting design gimmick. Will certainly get it noticed.

Of course I don't agree with the sentiment. But even in Egypt you have the right to your opinion and freedom of speech (good thing you don't live in Iraq though).

I just have some practical criticism.

Since nuclear weapons aren't being used in this war, what is the revelancy of the nuclear weapons statistics? Furthermore, how likely do you think it would be that Saddam Hussein would use nuclear weapons if he were allowed to build or buy them? America has an extensive system of checks and balances to prevent a dictatorship or military coup. Iraq has Saddam in command and anyone who dissents disappears.

The sanctions that were imposed on Iraq were a direct result of Saddam's actions. If he wanted the sanctions to be lifted to spare his own people, then he would have done what was necessary. Instead he continued to solidify his power and spent money on himself and his sons and his military programs.

Not signing a treaty does not mean the United States is against the rights of children. Assuming so would be just a logical error of the most basic kind.

I get an overall sense that you consider the United Nations as flawless and it's findings unbiased.

Bush has drawn up plans for a Palestinian state. All Clinton ever wanted to do was talk. Doesn't sound like the actions of a man who only sides with Israel.

America ain't perfect. But who is?

Very nice composition . The text is also very good.

great idea but I have to say im against it thoroughly

sure, the U.S. has made some mistakes - most of which I haven't lived long enough to see - but hasn't every country?

by 'fixing' the government of Iraq, who has oppressed its civilians, used biological weapons, and perhaps worked with terrorist groups, we free it's people and make the world a safer place

you have the right to your opinion, which I respect but disagree with - thats one of the great things about this nation... you have to realize that if an Iraqi civilian went against the plans of the government, Hussein would have them killed... here, people can freely debate about it

lol sick!

--
My Gallery

www.daprints.com/~naso