[edchambers]

He didn't pay off the familys of Palistinian suicide bombers?If he did, it was quite a bit less than Arafat and the Saudis.

You gotta start somewhere, Rumsfeld never ran the war plan by me but I suspect Iraq went down because it was considered easier and less controversial than the Saudis or Palis

He didn't support terrorist traing camps?

Again we could sit here and name half the Arab world that does
Again you gotta start somewhere

The pressing 'reason' was WMDs
Personally I think that was a mistake the terrorism support is much easier to prove the military outcome would have been the same but the political fallout wouldn't.

none of our buisiness so long as he didn't directly attack the continental US right?
Can you find something contrary to that point as outlined in the Constitution?

Just because something is not in the constitution doesn't mean it's not worth doing.

[billbears]

Just because something is not in the constitution doesn't mean it's not worth doing.

Ah, but that's a maybe and if you want to do it, then amend the Constitution, don't just act now and try to fix it later. The problem with this nation is that too many times in the past century and a half has the government acted well outside of the bounds of its charter and while the intentions may have been good in the end all it does is eat away at the fabric and intent of what the Founders established