[Fenris6]

preoccupied with nonexistent weapons of mass destruction in the Middle East.

At least his put his disqualifier at the front of the article. Saves me time ;)

[beyond the sea]

preoccupied with nonexistent weapons of mass destruction in the Middle East.

I wondered why he said that too. He should know, as we all rightfully suspect, that those weapons were removed from Iraq way before the U.S. military was able to get in there.

I only posted this because I was interested in the writer's take on the dollar and the world markets. I just think that our politicians may be keeping their heads in the sand on this issue, and it's very important, don't you think?

[SeaBiscuit]

"preoccupied with nonexistent weapons of mass destruction in the Middle East."

"his disqualifier at the front of the article."

LOL, True!! Why read past that first sentence!

[OldFriend]

Sounds like the spew from her heinous a few weeks ago.

The economy is on the verge of collapse, just bring back me and bill and all will be well.

[SaltyJoe]

It won't be much use to cry foul over a wild goose chase that caught no fowl.

The WMD may be nonexistent "now" that the world is breathing down the necks of tyrannical regimes in the Middle East. There was quite a paper trail as to it's existence before it was either buried in the sand, dumped in rivers, or burned.

Iran promises to be a nuclear power, and last I heard, "nuclear" is still included in the WMD category.

I think that the article's writer is throwing out stuff for shock value. The free world has more legitimacy in arguing national sovereignty to rid tyranny from nations like occupied Lebanon than to re-hash the WMD argument. Even if America doesn't lead military action against Syria, others looking for WMD there will probably only find sand.

Besides a coalition of forces meeting East of the port city Haifa, Israel sounds dangerously close to the apocalypse. We'd better be very careful about who talks us into assembly for a fight near Megiddo.