Alright , I gots ta weigh in on this thread as I've been watchin' ol' Frat house brat G. Dubya like a hawk ever since the powers that be that wanted him in surrounded him with all the "usual suspects" from the Papa Bush league; from Cheney to Kissinger to James Baker III ,and so on.

Here's the stone in my "comon sense" shoe. With all of this war talk including the "taking over of Iraq's oilfields" in order to supposedly calm the markets over the inevitable oil price-spike during a still shakey market , I have *yet* to here a single millitary strategist/talking head make mention of an obvious threat should we attempt to "take his oilfields".

Anyone remember the biblical proportions of the Kuwait oil fires that burned for a solid year . Knowing that Hussein has already proven that , when cornered , has no hesitancy to practice a scorched earth policy again. This is to say the moment our special forces get near those oil fields to "take possession" they will discover that Sadam is already predisposed to affect an '"If I can't have my oil, then *no* one can" posture and set off "dirty bomb" charges on each and every wellhead for all the world to see on CNN, CNBC, etc as it happens and then watch the market implode again.

The masters of war working president 'Muppet's' strings are quite literally playing with fire.

On a more positive note; the only thing really holding back this "pre-emptive strike" are the risks of failing to have any viable plan of "nation rebuilding" afterwards because if the G.Dubya Gang fails there they will be roasted alive for repeating the half-arsed job that the Papa Bushites left dangling.

Lord how well i remember when James Baker the III, in true Texas-style intellectualism , made the final case, whilst addressing a live audience , for going into battle with Saddam in '91; " it's about jobs, jobs, jobs!"

I rest my case. Carry on