Artful Dodger: "There's a difference between opinion and fact and it's pretty basic."

To examine the difference:

Let us say I demonstrate through mathematical proofs that 2+2=4. This then becomes recognized as a fact, through the demonstration. But the demonstration in itself does not bestow "facthood." 2+2=4 is true, or factual, regardless of any opinion to the contrary.

Now, suppose I have a different opinion, arising either from insufficient knowledge of mathematical principles or through purposeful disinformation by a pseudo-mathematician for reasons of his own. It can then be said that opinions differ, which is true. But FACTS don't differ! We can agree on this?

Turning now to the question at hand (i.e., was the U.S. invasion of Iraq unprovoked? and the corollary questions, Was it unjust? and, Was it illegal?), my point is simply this: just as 2+2=4, so it is proven by documentary evidence that the invasion of Iraq was, in fact, both unprovoked & pre-planned before 9/11. Secondly, such an unprovoked invasion of another country is illegal by definition, both by U.N. and U.S. law. And thirdly, such an unprovoked invasion is immoral, i.e., unjust on the face of it, if there be any rational standard of justice....which we all agree there is.

Now, you may have a contrary opinion, which is your right. However, if you do, then your opinion arises either from insufficient information or through purposeful disinformation by pseudo-intellectuals, for their own reasons. I suspect, in your case, the disinformation leads to a lack of information & also psychological immobolization, from which you ought to strive to free yourself (as we all must).

However, I will readily admit that this latter statement of mine (regarding how your mind in particular has been influenced & how it works) is an OPINION based on circumstantial evidence, not FACT based on incontrovertable evidence. But the facts referred to above are incontrovertable, no matter what opinion you or I may hold.