Some things to think over...

The missile that damaged an Israeli Saar V-class naval vessel was a Chinese C-802 anti-ship missile. How it got to Lebanon, and how it ended up being used by Hezbollah are good questions, but I think it is beyond dispute that the Iranians have transferred at least two (if not more) of these missiles to a terrorist organization, which has used them.

Folks, remember what President Bush and then-Secretary of State Colin Powell said prior to the liberation of Iraq? I'll repeat it as a reminder:

President Bush said:

Iraq could decide on any given day to provide a biological or chemical weapon to a terrorist group or individual terrorists.

Colin Powell told the UN:

Our concern is not just about these elicit weapons. It's the way that these elicit weapons can be connected to terrorists and terrorist organizations that have no compunction about using such devices against innocent people around the world.

The process of tranferring an anti-ship missile is pretty complex and difficult. Anti-ship missiles are big, and usually require a tractor-trailer rig to transport. They're also hard to hide from various prying eyes. The same is not as easily said for a few vials of anthrax or smallpox in a briefcase, enough sarin to poison a subway, or a nuclear warhead.

Think this over, then decide if we really can afford to take chances with the present regime in Iran. It would be nice if pro-democracy forces could emerge and take over, but I think we've run out of time for that process to work on its own. Direct action is going to be needed - and soon.

Also think over the fact that Saddam Hussein also had connections to terrorists, and ask yourself if his conduct throughout history was much better than the Iranian theocracy's. Remember, Saddam was handing out $25,000 checks to the families of murder-suicide bombers, and was also harboring all sorts of terrorists, including the late Abu Musab al-Zarqawi:

Those helping to run this camp are Zarqawi lieutenants operating in northern Kurdish areas outside Saddam Hussein's controlled Iraq. But Baghdad has an agent in the most senior levels of the radical organization, Ansar al-Islam, that controls this corner of Iraq. In 2000 this agent offered Al Qaida safe haven in the region. After we swept Al Qaida from Afghanistan, some of its members accepted this safe haven. They remain their today.

Zarqawi's activities are not confined to this small corner of north east Iraq. He traveled to Baghdad in May 2002 for medical treatment, staying in the capital of Iraq for two months while he recuperated to fight another day.

During this stay, nearly two dozen extremists converged on Baghdad and established a base of operations there. These Al Qaida affiliates, based in Baghdad, now coordinate the movement of people, money and supplies into and throughout Iraq for his network, and they've now been operating freely in the capital for more than eight months.

Iraqi officials deny accusations of ties with Al Qaida. These denials are simply not credible. Last year an Al Qaida associate bragged that the situation in Iraq was, quote, ``good,'' that Baghdad could be transited quickly.

We know these affiliates are connected to Zarqawi because they remain even today in regular contact with his direct subordinates, including the poison cell plotters, and they are involved in moving more than money and materiale.

If that's the sort of stuff Saddam was doing while under heavy sanctions from the UN and being watched closely, what might he have done had he not been under those sanctions? Was it really a bad idea to take him out?