Agreed. The Saddam/bin Laden connection has be downplayed, but (imo) the former was not only responsible for harboring al-Qaeda, but also was complicit in both the 9/11 attacks and the subsequent anthrax "warnings." He (and Iraq) be the first to pay the price, but others are waiting their turn.
It's my opinion that Iraq/Saddam was behind the highly refined, never been seen milled so fine anthrax. The reason, I believe, we haven't come out and said so is the proof is so thin and if we said it was them our stated policy on responding to WMD attacks with WMD attacks (all we have in nukes) would require us to Nuke Iraq.
To do it would be, to say the least, counter productive for middle east policy and to not do it and tell the world that we didn't back up our policy is to make the policy moot.
So we are going against Saddam another way and when the rest of the middle east sees Iraq flip to some form of Democracy they will become the 21st century version of the 80s Poland; the brick removed from the wall of tyranny in the middle east that starts to pull down the tyrants of the Arab world.
I believe if Iraq flips then Iran is next and then Jordan and the Emirates would eventually go and then maybe even Saudi Arabia and eventually Syria.
It's a dream but then again Reagan's dream came true.