[techweenie]

There are a few differences in the way I see things from araine901 and cegerer.

Military chatter is full of the disinformation told by captured Iraquis, who find it much more rewarding to tell their U.S. captors what they want to hear. Best estimates from the intelligence community were that Iraq was 10-12 years from having nuclear capability. And that was probably optimistic. Not to mention they'd have to find the materials. A nuclear program can't be hidden in '8 tankers'. But let's just say for the sake of argument that they did have WMDs a year and a half ago. Their SCUDs and other missles couldn't fly more than about 600 miles. So what 'immediate threat' were they to the U.S.?

Bioweapns and checmical weapons arguments are even thinner: accurately delivering those materials to a large target is such a challenge, they are nearly worthless tactically. Even a mild wind disperses them and reduces their effects.

As for the comment that 'little people' support Bush's campaign with their contributions, the opposite is true, The bulk are $2,000 contributions from the 'big people'. When you include the 'little people', Bush's approval rating is at 43%.