On the Question of the missing WMD

[mburbank]

Here's a thought.

A.) The administration insists there are WMD and they will be found.
B.) We don't know where the WMD are or who has them.
B.) There is still organized resistance in Iraq, though scattered.
C.) Saddam is still unnacounted for.


If A is the admins true position, why aren't we more concerned and ctively prepared for a WMD strike by Saddams forces? We were told almost hourly about the red line around Bahgdad and how the Iraqis were ready to go with WMD when we crossed it.

Since there's still active resistance, we don't know where their leader is, we don't know where the weapons are, why isn't this still an imminent threat? And if it is an imminent threat, should we have civillian administrator in Iraq yet? Shouldn't we still be in an active military stance, still at war as it were, until the WMD, the reistnace and Saddam are all accounted for?