"clear and present danger"
Again, what specifically would you consider evidence of "a clear and present danger," and how many lives would you estimate the presentation of this evidence would cost? A gun only smokes after it is fired.
Everyone talks about the dangers of war. Nobody talks about the equally possible dangers of leaving Saddam alone.
Apparently, a madman possessing weapons of mass destruction, and who has actually used them before, does not seem to fill the bill as dangerous. I find this particularly hilarious coming from a number of people who are also convinced that no private American citizen should own a gun lest he someday shoot someone with it.