i am being totally honest when i say that i am a very sheltered person. recently, the only time i've known what's been going on in the world is when i attend my victorian literature class on tuesdays and thursdays. yep, the rest of the time i'm either sleeping or on the computer. i don't know whether my lack of knowledge for politics and current events prevents me from being interested and up-to-date in world events, or i'm just scared and in denial. i'm feeling the latter is more correct.

the less i know about how close we are to going to war, the longer i can be secure that my whole world won't be turned upside down. my biggest concern has to be jon, my family, and my friends. i don't want jon getting drafted and dropped in the middle of a war. i want him safe, right here next to me. and i don't want my family all the way on the other side of the nation and my sister in a totally different country while i'm stuck on a rock in the middle of the pacific ocean, which on any ordinary day might seem like paradise, but is now becoming more and more like hell. and the same goes to my friends. i want noel and robert and ryan and sean and dustin and brent and bryce and chad and ian and collin and digga and the other jon and ian and jeremy and xave and zac here, not in the deserts of iraq.

i want to continue to live in my pretend perfect world. where everyone is happy and the world isn't about to be destroyed. so does this mean that i'm against going to war? i'm really not sure. what are we fighting for? is it all because saddam *might* have nuclear weapons? or is it because sadam *might* have nuclear weapons and is crazy enough to use them? what about north korea? why aren't we contemplating going to war with them? at least we know for sure that they have nuclear weapons. why aren't they a threat? is it really all about the oil?

maybe my reasons are superficial. i mean, no one wants their loved ones going to war. i'm sure i would be more accepting of going to war if it was for a good cause. but what would that cause be? what is worth sacrificing the people i love for? i just want to go back to being ignorant and in denial, it's not so depressing.

we know that saddam hussein is determined to keep his weapons of mass destruction; he's determined to make more. given saddam hussein's history of aggression, given what we know of his grandiose plans, given what we know of his terrorist associations and given his determination to exact revenge on those who oppose him, should we take the risk that he will not some day use these weapons at a time and the place and in the manner of his choosing at a time when the world is in a much weaker position to respond? the united states will not and cannot run that risk to the american people. leaving saddam hussein in possession of weapons of mass destruction for a few more months or years is not an option, not in a post-september 11th world. – excerpt from u.s. secretary of state colin powell's conclusion; wednesday, 05 february 2003

owari.