[Bernard Marx]

Whether anyone cares to admit it or not, President Bush has a serious problem if WMD are not found in Iraq

I entirely agree. Something's rotten in the State of the CIA and the whole pre-Iraq-invasion intelligence assessment. My mind keeps going back to Scott Ritter who said so confidently pre-invasion that no WMD would be found. I think he's a paid Hussein shill but maybe, just maybe, he's in on something the rest of us don't suspect. I want to know what it is if it exists. Is he part of a political set-up for Bush? (I just located the Alcoa Wrap -- doing head origami).

[thtr]

I don’t know if he was set-up or not. I sure hope there is no conspiracy here.

Nevertheless, President Bush is responsible. If no WMD are located and destroyed then a lot of Americans gave up their lives to free the Iraqi people from a terrible dictator – an admirable action – but not worth a single American life, in my opinion.

[Freedom4US]

No, read between the lines. A similar, if opposite, situation ocurred with President Eisenhower during the cold war. His intelligence at the time indicated that the Soviets had nowhere near the missile capability that was publicly believed. Accordingly, he reduced military spending. His loyal opposition, the Democrats knew this as well - but chose to publicly brand the President as "Soft on Communism" - since the real military situation could not be publicly announced. It could be we're seeing something analagous right now - political maneuvering at the expense of overall national security.