George Will's simple point is: own up to it. In some circles we would say, "Be a mensch."

In a normal world, you'd be right. In the political world, it's suicide. Should Bush say such a thing, the Democrats will tear him to shreds, using the false conclusion that NOTHING justified the war in Iraq if there were no weapons found later. They will also go back to saying Bush deliberately lied about it, like Kennedy said, (who then pissed and moaned because Bush said this statement was "uncivil.") Have any of his opponents cut Bush the slightest break on any of this so far?

When we were done bombing the crap out of Eastern Europe, it was found that the atrocities there, although real, were far less than the numbers that had been floated before the war. Who paid a penalty for this? Anyone?

There's another factor here that keeps getting swept under the rug.

If our intelligence was wrong, so was everyone else's. The Clinton administration came to the same conclusions about WMD as Bush's did. British intelligence also came to the same conclusions. Before the war almost everyone was convinced that there was a likely weapons program ongoing in Iraq. The only difference was how it should be dealt with: war, or diplomacy and the U.N.?

If they were ALL wrong, this bears serious thinking about. If so many intelligence outfits and government leaders can be consistently fooled, what current intelligence might be flawed even as we speak? What about Iran and North Korea? What about China? What about almost ANYTHING that affects our national security?

You and others are correct when you say there are a lot of things that need looking into. If Democrats in Washington could get past "how do we try and destroy Bush today?," something constructive might happen.

Too bad the UN Charter currently doesn't allow the overthrow of despots among legitimate justifications for violation of national sovreignty.

Not surprising. It would be like axe murderers outlawing sharp implements. Have you checked out the U.N. membership lately?