Ok, 2 war scenarios:
1) There are few Iraqi victims , few US vicitims, Saddam is found dead or alive, the oil fields are safe, there were no terrorist attacks in the world, the war was short and huge stockpiles of WMD's were found
Bush is a clear winner.

2) There are thousands of innocent Iraqi victims, Saddam has disappeared, the oil fields are burning visible from the ISS, there are more US casualties than during gulf War1, there are terrorist attacks around the world, the war was a little too long and very few stocks of WMD's were found.
Bush will have to face it.

It certainly going to be somewhere in between....but where?

But anyway, there will be an afterwar....and the Iraqis don't want the US involvment in that.

A propos, As for Belgium, it is a corrupt and powerless country ....Very interesting!
the author should elaborate a lot more about those assertions; it shows he's not credible.
But anyway, the anger towards the "Axis of Weasel" shows how much its viewpoint matters as it's the same as that of the great majority of the european public opinion.

Chirac said in september 2002 (my translation):"In Iraq, the americans are seeking to engage into a power revolution end they isolate themselves in a logic of fear. But they are wrong.
What's striking is not their power, but the emptiness of that power. What they don't get is that power alone is vain. Arabs must not be humiliated, otherwise it's the explosion".
Contrary to Bush's advisors who want to impose their democracy concept to the world, France wants to incarnate sharing, exchange, dialogue of the cultures. And Chirac adds: "There's no choice, otherwise it's confrontation, civilization shock. The excess of power corrodes power".

Raoul