Amos,

In your post above you say that you believe that:

"....Congress is going to give him his endorsement."

I assume that the elected representatives that make up your Senate and House of Representatives are not all sheep - Why are they going to give him his endorsement? - Could one reason be that he has convinced them. I am sure that they have received a far more detailed briefing than Joe Public.

Yourself, Bobert, Nicole, McGoH and others keep demanding facts and evidence. As things stand at the moment the following represent the facts of the situation as I see them as a member of Joe Public:

1. The current regime in power in Iraq has openly threatened it's immediate neighbours at least three times in the last 44 years (1958, 1980 and 1991). It also openly backs Hamas and provides financial incentive and aid to suicide bombers and their families. Along with Iran it still adheres to the aim of total annihilation of the State of Israel.

2. This regime has not moderated its stance in the above respect since the conclusion of "Desert Storm", a conflict, which Saddam Hussein believes he won. Binding commitments made by the Iraqi regime, after cessation of hostilities in 1991, have all been totally ignored.

3. At the end of the Gulf War, the UNSC put into force a number of resolutions designed to stabilise the situation in this part of the world with respect to Iraq. Those resolutions were aimed at protecting minority ethnic groups within Iraq, improving the country's human rights record and the total removal from Iraq's military capability of weapons of mass destruction and their means of delivery.

4. To accomplish the tasks set out in the UNSC resolutions, monitors and inspection teams were put in place. Did the Iraqi regime afford them full co-operation and unhindered access? According to the people comprising those teams - No they did not. Throughout the seven year period that they were in place, those teams were subjected to a carefully orchestrated programme of intimidation, evasion and deception - Why?

5. The UNSCOM Team reported to the UN that although much of Iraq's WMD stocks and delivery systems had been destroyed, they could not ascertain to any degree of comfort, or confidence, that Iraqi capability had been totally destroyed.

6. UN inspection teams were removed by the UN in 1998, as it was becoming increasingly clear that there was no way that they could fulfil the tasks set them by the UN in the light of hardening Iraqi attitudes with regard to access to sites of interest. This hardening of Iraqi attitudes took place with the current UN resolutions in force and was, in all probability driven by lack of progress with regard to the lifting of sanctions by the UN. Sanctions however were brought in to ensure Iraqi compliance with UN resolutions, not as the sliding scale reward perceived by Baghdad.

7. There are records of Iraqi attempts to obtain equipment and materials to restart its nuclear weapons programme. Why?

8. Since 1998 sites and facilities previously used for WMD production and for missile development are being brought back into production. Why?

I would very much like to know;

1. Whether, or not, you agree with the above as being a reasonable summation of the situation.

2. What is your evaluation of that situation.

3. Proposed course of action if required.

Thanks.