Got enough information?

[Undertoad]

It's still the early days of this, the "big Iraq debate", I think. And to me it feels like OJ revisited.

During the early days of OJ, I would sway between guilty and not-guilty by the hour. As people made various points, they seemed to make sense and I would re-consider all the time.

It took until about halfway through the trial when things made sense; there was enough damning blood evidence, conflicting alibis, etc. that I swayed to the "guilty" side to stay.

I hear good points made on both sides of the debate. But how can you possibly have enough information to make the decision?

We don't see the military information that would tell us what parts of it were going to be easy and what parts difficult. We don't know how many troops are going to remain stationed elsewhere, or how many should be reserved in case the Koreas get snippy or etc. We don't get the intelligence information. We don't have anyone to bring all this together for us.

This is why Congress has to be consulted. There may well be intel information that says we have to go RIGHT AWAY! But we can't trust that decision to a select number of people in the administration with some flimsy pretext.

Congress is sometimes a moronic, stead, slow-moving bunch who really only represent a tiny fraction of the population (the ones in the political cliques that get races won). But at least they are elected and have a sense of responsibility towards their constituents. Sometimes. At least they have some experience making decisions, and a staff to manage response from the people.

If they take a look at all sides, and come to a decision, I think I would respect that and feel pretty good about it no matter what the decision is.