[DentsRun]

The Broder article raises a lot of questions (and, at least for me) leaves a lot of the more important ones unanswered. I keep reading about the urgent need to attack Iraq but I still don't understand the reasons why.

Is Iraq a greater threat to us than China? If not, why don't we first attack China? She's the one with thermonuclear weapons and independently targeted re-entry vehicles. Compared to China, Iraq has diddlysquat nuclear capablity and no means to deliver a warhead anyway.

Also what is the legal basis for Bush's authority to attack Iraq? Isn't he supposed to ask congress to declare war first? Why isn't congress debating the issue? Is it the administration's position that it doesn't need congressional authorization? If so, are there any limits at all on the president's authority to go to war with anyone at any time?

I don't necessarily oppose a war with Iraq, but I sure oppose one where the reasons aren't spelled out, where the matter isn't publicly debated and where congress hasn't given its formal approval.

[pkpjamestown]

Your questions are very logical and I don't want to start analysing events and situations, because there will be no end. I get the feeling that we have applied the principle of Keynesian policymaking: look after the short run and the long run will look after itself.