First Iraq’s weapons declaration contained “obvious omissions”, now the evidence against Iraq is “unmistakable”, and I’m certain that the Bush administration has thrown in more than a few uses of the words “clear” or “clearly” in its condemnation of Iraq. If the argument for war is so “clear”, “obvious”, or “unmistakable” then where is this unquestionable evidence, and why aren’t other members of the UN Security Council buying into the rhetoric? Finally, here comes Secretary of State Colin Powell with some evidence: satellite images and overheard conversations. The US is meeting up with some of its most trusted allies and all it has are pictures and “he said, she said” gossip? Personally, I’d like to give UN inspectors more time to search for hard evidence rather than risk all-out war, death and destruction on soft evidence.

An interesting choice of language from Tony Blair:

Meanwhile, Prime Minister Tony Blair of Britain rallied anew to support the United States. “Show weakness now and no one will ever believe us when we try to show strength in the future,” he said in France as he prepared for a meeting Tuesday with French President Jacques Chirac, who is reluctant to go to war at this point.

So, despite the lack of strong evidence, everyone should support the US and the UK on a war against Iraq or else nobody will believe them when they threaten with force at a later date. Uh-huh. Maybe if they hadn’t started with the loud, empty threats and weak arguments, they wouldn’t be in this mess. Perhaps they would still have support if they had kept up with their war on terrorism and the hunt for Osama bin what’s-his-name.

All this talk of politics is making me angry. Where are my pills?