>Already reporters are talking about the political
>ramifications of Saddam's capture to the Bush
>administration. Saying that this is a blow to the
>Democrats, as they have been using an elusive Saddam to
>attack Pres. Bush for the past 8 months. Well, considering
>that this was an illegal war, I don't see how this capture
>weighs in the favor of Bush. Had Osama Bin Laden been
>captured, that would be another story. Of course there are
>those who will say that Saddam was a tyrant, and his capture
>is a victory for the US, the Bush Administration and the
>Iraqi people. But what does his capture really mean? For
>the past 8 months Saddam has been out of commission as a
>leader, and still the Iraqi people have no peace or clear
>political system. Hell, they're not even in control of
>their #1 resource, oil. Everyday the death toll for US
>soldiers rises in Iraq. The attacks on US troops that were
>attributed to Saddam, to his financing, appear to be sourced
>from someone else. So Saddam is captured. He'll be brought
>before trial, maybe in Iraq, maybe before an international
>tribunal. He'll be found guilty of numerous crimes. Maybe
>he'll be put to death.
>
>And that leaves us where? Maybe with lower gas prices.
>That's always a good reason to start an illegal war.

Although I believe your statements are correct. I disagree that is will not be a political victory for Bush. I believe the majority of the american voting public have the critical thinking skills of a 3 month old. So although you make very valid points, we are talking about people who think with emotions and not logic.