WMDs was .....

[barbara100 at jps.net]

> It may seem that I'm agreeing with Bush because I'm
> not fooled by the Democrat/Liberal argumet that says
> that this War is not about WMD. It is about WMD. this
> is the world we have been living with for some time.
> We live with the rocket and we live with the death
> instinct. 

How about Scott Ritter's arguement? He doesn't think it's about WMDs, and he's about the last guy to have looked:

[...]

"The Bush administration says on the one hand that a strike against Iraq is necessary because of weapons of mass destruction (WMD), and in the same breath it says that the issue of the inspectors no longer matters. This suggests WMD are not the issue. What is the issue then? Why are they advocating war? They tell the American public that war against Iraq is necessary because Iraq, with its WMD, poses a threat to US security.

"The only way out of this situation is to allow the inspectors back, so that they can tell the world that Iraq has no WMD. Only when they say so can the American public discover that a war against Iraq is not a war in defence of the interests of the Americans, but is a war waged to further the interests of the Bush administration."

[...]