Re 1) You questioned the threat of Iraqs mili-tary to the US. That is a strawman. Saddam was portrayed as a threat because of his ability to provide terrorists with WMD not because of his army. WMD was issue number one, Iraqi liberation and threat to neighbors were (contrary to Davin's statements) issues used as additional if secondary justification. Do you think the UN sanctions on ranges over 90 miles were for the US's benefit?

Re WMD: The pawns in suicide attacks were not the ones in charge of chemical weapons. Does your army place its most potent weapons in the hands of privates? I also forgot to mention that the US bombed and bombed and bombed potential delivery weapons. What good are shells without artillery. All the reasons I gave make a lot more sense than all that circumstantial evidence found just being a coincidence.

RE terrorists: Yet I heard many in the anti-war camp claim none existed outside of the Northern one prior to the war. Saddam had people terrified to speak freely yet you think he would allow armed factions within his area of control without his permission. To be fair, I may have been mistaken about the location of the second camp. After hearing some other reports I'm not sure it was in his area or in the Southern no fly zone. At any rate I thought he was still largely in control in the South as opposed to the Kurdish North.

Regards,
Mark