<This decision is NOT forced because we have NO honest knowledge that there is IMMEDIATE danger form Iraq. There WAS time to come up with other options EVEN IF we are to believe in the eventuality of Iraq attacking the USA.

A pattently unstable trigger-man (proven through his tactical choices over the past 12 years).

That, in a phrase, was Saddam Hussein. He may still be with us, but he is no longer the trigger-man. He's merely unstable.

He HAS attacked other nations with WMD
He HAS threatened to attack other nations with WMD
He HAS threatened retaliation with WMD

Iraq was never the problem, Davin. Hussein was. He makes personal choices that effect his people, as well as the surrounding international community. This includes Israel, which, like it or not, is a HUGE U.S. interest. Just stop in at your local synagogue and ask. Hussein knew this, so he kept choosing Israel as his main retaliatory target -- essentially taking a nation (a known U.S. interest) hostage.

Now -- what was that third way you mentioned? Was it -- wait a while and see who he blows up first?

Cheers,
Dan