[Senator_Palpatine]

Good. I have the Senate bogged down in procedures. By the time this incident comes up for a vote, they will have no choice but to accept your control of the system. Iraq is sparsely populated. If the trace was correct, We will find them quickly.....

Move against the Republican Army first...you will then have no difficulty taking Saddam back to Baghdad, where he will sign the treaty.

"BEGIN LANDING YOUR TROOPS'

[FreedomFriend]

My point is that there has to be a reasonable belief that Saddam has weapons of mass destruction and is intending to use them.

This is not something that you mosey into. This is serious stuff, and it will cost a lot of lives.

To me, the Saudis have harbored the terrorists, but for some reason we're going after Saddam first. I'll give you that he is not a nice guy. However, there has to be clear, observable evidence.

I wonder why so many of you think that it is okay for the U.S to invade another country without significant knowledge. On the other hand, if the U.S. were being attacked, you would think that is terrible. Again, I don't doubt that Saddam is a bad guy. Yet, I do not want the U.S. getting dragged into a long, casualty-filled war without significant evidence.

[weikel]

Cool.