An open question for all: Many of us have come to the conclusion that GB is not the brightest star to have come out of the Texas night; and whatever his motivation for deciding to create the current mess in Iraq will remain a mystery for most of us. Ultimately, his motivation doesn't really matter. The men surrounding him do not suffer this same lack of resource and it's reasonable to assume that whoever was pulling the strings was of sufficient intelligence to realize that the United States was not in the position to receive any benefit from the adventure in Iraq. Perhaps they were not so prescient to predict the extent of the struggle, but its fair to assume that they were intelligent enough to devise this scheme for some beneficiary. The question remains - who did they percieve to be the eventual beneficiary? glecco ------------------------------------------------ Cui bono From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia "Cui bono ("Good for whom?", or "Who benefits?") is a Latin adage which means that the person or people guilty of committing a crime may be found amongst those who have something to gain, perhaps financially. Although the principle is useful in criminal investigations, the party with the most to gain may not always be obvious, or the guilty party may distract attention by diverting attention on to a scapegoat. The expression is said to have been coined by Roman consul and censor Lucius Cassius Longinus Ravilla."