"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."

I have a love hate relationship with Clinton. There is only ONE incident that I am tempted to call wag-the-dog... The bombing of Yemen post Lewinsky. And yes, I have no proof and will have no proof that that was his intention- so it remains a 'doubt' and far from the truth.

And yes, it would be about as vile as bombing a preschool.

"Bush more votes than the non-issue of unfound WMD."

Frank, if WMD is a non-issue, then the american state is bankrupt- hilt to tip. How can you say its a non issue?

"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."

I hope you are wrong. If you are right, I might as well give up discussing politics.

"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. "

Frank, do you think this is the way events *should* unfold? That the administration can be this incorrect, inept or dishonest and be voted in if he can get the lights on in the occupied country?

Davin L.