Grandpa - I think the heat and the blazing speed of your new internet connection has given you heat stroke. This really must be a big deal and a large potential liability for the GOP if Rush and his EIB network is dredging this up. A letter written 5 years ago is not particularly germane to the discussion at hand. Certainly in my industry (technology) 5 years is a lifetime. Have things changed in your life over the last 5 years? Has the Political climate and the World changed in the last 5 years? How are we to know that Sadaam didn't buckle under the pressure from Bill Clinton and destroy his WMD at that time? BTW, that is more of a rhetorical question, I am not suggesting that actually happened, just trying to illustrate that 5 years is a long time.

My issues are this:

1. President Bush used the WMD arguement as his centerpiece for going to war. As a result of that, and the fact that WMD's have not been found, we are letting our staunchest ally - Tony Blair - slowly twist in the wind and right now we need every friend that we can get.

2. If President Bush chose other reasons for selling this war to the American public, I could have gone along with them. Some that I would not: "We need to free the Iraqi people from this brutal dictator" This is a nice, feel good arguement, but there are (unfortunately) even more brutal dictators in the world causing more heartbreak and misery to their people.

"There is a tangible link between Sadaam Hussein and the 9/11 attacks" Even GW couldn't sell this one.

"We need to have regime change in Iraq" - This one gets closer to something I can support, but has one big problem. Once we legitimize regime change as a reason for going to war - the genie is out of the bottle. My guess is that there are several countries that have the willingness although thankfully not the means to execute regime change in the US.

Finally, one reason that I could have absolutely supported. "We need to show the Islamic Extremists that we are not cowed by their actions. We shall go into a large Arab nation and show them that we are mad as hell and not going to take it anymore." I truly wish that GW had used this logic. I believe the American people would have supported him. His seemingly bogus arguement about WMD reminds me of the Democrat's scare tactics over Social Security. Play on someones fear and you will gain their support. Certainly intellectually dishonest and maybe even more sinister than that. I find it hard to believe that intellegent, clear thinking people such as yourself bought the WMD arguement in the first place. I believed then, and I believe now, that North Korea still offers the greater threat. Even more so now that we have announced a pullout from the DMZ in Korea.

So, a long winded post - but serious none the less. My intention is to try and let you know that even though I am a liberal and I generally vote Democrat, I love my country and am very concerned about what I consider bogus arguements for going to war. It's probably even money that Blair will lose his job over this. And, like the boy that cried "Wolf", GW's credibilty and by extension the credibility of the US has suffered a very damaging blow.

Having said all this, if WMD are found in Iraq, I shall post here that I was wrong. Hell, I might even vote for the son of a buck in 2004!

Take care my friend, catch some fish, and keep cool.