At the time, I did not believe that Clinton dropped the bombs to wag the dog and I am still not certain. In spite of his weak behavior, I have a hard time believing that men of power would do a thing like that knowing that their close subordinates would probably know why they were doing it. You know that he didn't act without any miilitary concurrance and supporting advice. It would also be so reprehensible that I can't fully get my mind around it. Like most conspiracy theories it is just too cheesy.

Add this to the fact that it obviously didn't work and for the magnitude of the deed it had little chance of success. The cost-benefits analysis doesn't work. The event was coincidental to his problem and the diversion angle may have occured to him. I suppose it could have even had some minor psychological effect on his decision to go forward.

Bush would know that for Clinton the diversion was ineffective. He would also know that in Liberia there is always the chance that we would be drawn into an ambush. I can assure you that continued daily casualties in Iraq compounded by more casualties in Liberia will cost Bush more votes than the non-issue of unfound WMD. Nobody cares about the missing WMD. Everybody cares if he was lying but the odds are 100:1 that you will be telling your grandchildren about Bush and his lost WMD and they will be rolling their eyes wondering what you are talking about.

Forgetabout Liberia, if we continue to take daily casualties in Iraq and fail to consolidate the situation, Bush will pay dearly in 2004 but the WMD will only be an afterthought far less important than the Tonkin Gulf incident. If he gets the power on and gets the country pacified he will win big in 2004 and WMD will be no more than a footnote in history.