<Well, this isn't a forced decision. there is no decision tree.

You sure TALK like someone who has all his discussions at college coffee houses. Throw in enough jargon and maybe nobody will notice that there isn't any "there" there.

We aren't talking about something where you pick one of two things, or pick neither. If I lost you with the term "decision tree," I'm sorry. Think of a diamond on a binary logic diagram. You get yes or no. You don't get "maybe," or "splunge."

Two choices MEANS two choices. Not making a choice was one of them.

- We take Saddam out.

It has been proven by the past three weeks beyond the shadow of a doubt that nothing less than full-bore military action would get Saddam to change his behavior in any real way, never mind disarm or give up power.

- We don't take Saddam out. The status quo.

If we left him in power, it has been established by long experience that no amount of U.N. resolutions, admonishments, diplomatic efforts, international embargoes, sanctions, or any other paper threats would get Saddam to change his behavior in any real way, never mind disarm or give up power. Hell, Blix wouldn't have gotten into the country at all if we hadn't had the fleet parked next door.

If you think leaving Saddam in is a valid choice, fine. At least that's something. But you, and anyone else pretending that we could have accomplished anything by doing "something else" are blowing smoke, and the sooner that line gets dropped the sooner we can all go on from here.

This coin has no goddam third face. One would think I would have proved this by now since I have blanked pretty much every one of you out with the question of "what IS the alternative?"

All the blathering in the world about how there MUST be a third face to a two-dimensional object if we just looked hard enough is meaningless.