"Did I say that the US supplied Saddam?"
You asked me to remind you who did, and so I did so.
"was Bush suggesting that the use of WMD's wasn't imminent? What was that imminent non existant threat that his ally Mr Blair kept harping on about again?"
You missed my point completely. I stated and also quoted Bush as stating that waiting for proof of Saddam being an absolute 45 minute imminent threat was not an option in todays world. Bush stated again, explcitily- "If this threat is permitted to fully and suddenly emerge, all actions, all words, and all recriminations would come too late."
"......who supplied Hans Blix with his information in the first place?"
Hans Blix, and his team at UNSCOM.
"Do you think that there is anything healthy about innocent Iraqi's suffering from the coalition use of cluster bombs?"
No, it horrible any time that innocent people are killed inadvertently.
"These exist, in large unexploded numbers, all over the place in Iraq. Shame that some people do not share your concern for the ordinary Iraqi. "
And the coalition forces are working to remove them. Ask your son, I have already spoken with friends of mine who did this very thing in Afghanistan, disarming cluster bombs. Incidentally, do you know why they use cluster bombs?
"I ask again, who is a Saddam appeaser on this site? If you cannot back up your comment, I suggest that you show some prudence and withdraw it."
I am not here to call individual people in to judgement. Since you are asking me, I would say you are not an appeaser, since you have supported Saddams removal, and like myself, would love to see the Coalition go after other thugs like Kim Jong or the Iranian Mullahs. Those who were against the war but wanted to remove Saddam are somewhat hypocritical, because there was no doubt that this was the only way to remove him. Thus, if one was against the war, you were for appeasing Saddam instead of standing up to him.
So yes, anyone who did not support removing Saddam is de facto a Saddam appeaser.