[Physicist]

THE term "smoking gun" is one of the more ridiculous phrases to have emerged from the recent argument over intervention against Saddam Hussein.

It is an expression originally evolved from corruption or deceit in American politics, which means evidence of a crime.

I'll stipulate to that, but then he says:

The expression is absurd in two ways. First, Saddam Hussein has already been caught red-handed

What does Hitchens think this expression means, if not evidence of a crime?

Is he saying that Saddam is more of a stabber than a shooter?

[trebb]

I think his point is:

A smoking gun is evidence of a crime having been committed.

Sadaam has been caught red-handed and there is more than just evidence, there is proof of a crime.

Why would some idiot say we haven't found a smoking gun if we got the bullet-ridden bodies for proof?

He was making our case to not waste any more time...

[lepton]

I think Hitchens is pointing ouut the same thing that you are.