[Maria S]

Excerpt from the KENNETH M. POLLACK article you referenced (and thanks for posting it...I had missed it):

"I later moved on to the National Security Council, where I served two tours, in 1995-1996 and 1999-2001. During the latter stint the intelligence community convinced me and the rest of the Clinton Administration that Saddam had reconstituted his WMD programs following the withdrawal of the UN inspectors, in 1998, and was only a matter of years away from having a nuclear weapon. In 2002 I wrote a book called Threatening Storm: The Case for Invading Iraq, in which I argued that because all our other options had failed, the United States would ultimately have to go to war to remove Saddam before he acquired a functioning nuclear weapon. Thus it was with more than a little interest that I pondered the question of why we didn't find in Iraq what we were so certain we would."

[VOA]

Excerpt from the KENNETH M. POLLACK article you referenced (and thanks
for posting it...I had missed it):

My pleasure...the only reason I stumbled onto the article was because some dough-head
had been allowed to post a (basically) "Pollack totally reverses course"
comment under his book at amazon.com.

The Atlantic Monthly article is anything but.
In the worst light, I read it as a Cover Your @&& article as Pollack had
really pushed the "just in time" WMD capability (and that did really make sense)...
now that he's a poohbah at some research institute.

But, more realistically, his article is a decent review of all the events
leading up to and through the subjugation of Saddam's regime.
I suspect that is why we don't see/hear Pollack on every media outlet. He simply
confirms that just the intelligence apparati of just about every major country
believed what Dubya believed.

And that's the last thing Kerry and his fellow-travelers what Americans
(and the world) to hear.

Plus no speculations about what hideous outcomes might (and likely) have occurred
if Uday and Quasay had eventually assumed the reins of power.