- Saddam is not a threat if his nuclear weapons aren't on line until 2006

- Apparently it's a much better idea to wait until he DOES have the nuclear weapons to take him out.

Also, he seems to have a small disconnect in verbal understanding. I see no conflict at all between a statement that says Saddam is five years away from possessing an atomic bomb, and a statement that we cannot wait until he already has one to act.

I wonder what Mark's threshold is for action...a bomb on display? A nuclear test in the Iraqi desert? Waiting for the fissionables to be accumulated, but attack before the bomb itself is machined? I'm sure there's a line there somewhere. He obviously doesn't like where Bush drew his.

Unfortunately, Mark's blog doesn't seem to have a comment section.

By the way, it isn't very clear when you are talking in this post and when Mark is talking. I do see the quotes, but it helps to kick it out a bit better. Please try and master the HTML commands--blockquote is useful, and it's obvious you still don't quite have the hang of link callouts. Use the "preview" command. It's saved my bacon countless times.