Yes, instead we waited until Japan blew up most of the Pacific Fleet at Pearl Harbor.
If you believe that the terrorists who attacked us were directly supported by Saddam Hussain, then please by all means present your evidence and, if it is convincing, I'll be completely behind obliterating Iraq or any other nation that directly supported the terrorists.
Tuor
You raise very good points, but let me throw a spanner in the works by asking the following: What level of detail do you require? Suppose some of the Government's knowledge about Iraq is through highly-placed turncoats in Saddam's own party. Saddam thinks they're local, but they'll be part of the new government when he goes. Do we disclose their presence and the information that they've provided?
That was a hypothetical scenario, but its not that much of a stretch - Orin Hatch, in a stupid blunder told a reporter (almost boastingly) they we could pin-point Osama bin Laden's position. How do you know? Came the question. Because we can track his cell phone, came the reply. Guess who stopped using his cell phone?
Providing absolute proof that will convince all the doubters is a monumental task. And if you have a piece of information, but cannot reveal where you got it, will you be believed? What kind of evidence would you need to be satisfied? I do not know what the right answer is. But, I am more willing to give this administration the benefit of the doubt than Clinton's.