Quoting:
Ha! You can rest assured that there ARE most certainly hidden agendas. I wouldn't be surprised if they know where old Bin is...but of course, they can't broadcast it, because every international vigilante will show up at his door to play baseball with his adam's apple
End Quote

With the kind of reward out for Bin Laden, I'm surprised someone hasn't served his head on a platter!

Quoting:They probably know right where he is.End Quote

I will not speculate. It'd be pointless.

Quoting:
Didn't "hidden agenda" refer to Iraq?
End Quote

Yes, but they seem to get continually intertwined somehow.

Quoting:
Why not go after terrorists instead of Iraq? Does anyone think Iraq will ever have the wepons to attack us, or is our action in defense of Isreal?
End Quote

Yes, Iraq will have the weapons to attack us.  They already have biological weapons and it is safe to assume that they are working on getting nuclear weapons.  Saddam Hussein is crazy enough to use a nuke and believe that he would win.  I think that we would be justified in attacking Iraq.

I do hope that there won't be a war, though.  All I am saying is that if there is I will be behind the president 100%.

Quoting:
Why is US policy on Iraq, where the evidence is still only circumstantial as to the existence of 'weapons of mass destruction', different to that on North Korea, which now proudly claims to have not only a nuclear capacity, but a nuclear arsenal?
End Quote

Because Saddam has a sketchy porn-stache and North Korea bribes the USA with kim-chee :P

Honestly, I don't know...perhaps it is because of the oil that Iraq controls, or maybe Iraq just has a worse reputation not just of weapons development but of human rights violations.

Quoting:
North Korea is a whole other kettle of fish.  In my opinion, they're a bigger threat than Iraq, by a lot.  But they have a real army, and it's not going to be the walkover it will be in Iraq.  
End Quote

My thoughts exactly. Plus the fact that Iraq could be wiped off the map and no one would really care. Saddam's regime isn't exactly liked even by other Arab nations. I imagine many of them would be rubbing their hands together thinking about getting their mits on the Iraqi oilfields. As for North Korea, well they'd only have to pop off a couple of missiles in the right direction and BAM! No more LA. No more Seattle. No more Chicago, and so on. No matter what Bush's rhetoric, Iraq couldn't do that quite as easily.

Quoting:
Of course Steve is right. I forgot that North Korea is a puppet state of the People's Republic. I don't think anyone wants to mess with them.
End Quote

Quoting:


It still is cuckoo... don't forget we're also out for blood and are gonna git them cigar-smokin' commies and Khadafi (BTW, whatever happened to that dude ??? He sure is glad he's not Saddam right about now :D ).
End Quote

Quoting:
Why is US policy on Iraq, where the evidence is still only circumstantial as to the existence of 'weapons of mass destruction', different to that on North Korea, which now proudly claims to have not only a nuclear capacity, but a nuclear arsenal?
End Quote

Outside of China becomming involved if the U.S. attacked Korea and the fact that we fought them once and were less than 100% sucessfull, the reason Bush is going after Iraq is he wants to stay in the White House. I know it is early, but think of the "rallying" effect a decisive win would have. There would be no more jokes about Bush's intellect. He would be a bon-a-fide foriegn policy expert. My feelings are Iraq is insignificant. They could not ever expect to cause any harm to the United States, because the retaliation would be so strong. Instead, you see pockets of terrorists stewing in fustration over US involvement in their section of the globe, and planning on ways to harm us. If we never would have involved ourselves with Iraq in 89, we would be better off because the terrorists would be aiming their agression elsewhere. Let the terrorists kill one another, like they did when Iraq and Iran were at war for 10 years. One other point, did anyone ever care to ask why Sadam is going after the Kurds, and why we should care about the Kurds? I would rather spend my tax money helping Americans than Kurds.

Quoting:
I read on CNN.com today that there might be a miscommunication or a semantic doubt about North Korea's claim to have a nuclear weapon...it's on the front page, www.cnn.com

But if North Korea is a puppet state of China, don't you think they'd be under some level of control from China, who right now is more or less a USA ally?   ???
End Quote

I think it is a more of an us against them mentality for China and North Korea. While China does not control North Korea, they see the importance of reducing United States control in thier region. Didn't McArthur want to go straight through North Korea into China during the Korean War? China is a communist state, so they know the United States wants a change of government there. Plus, with China wanting Tiwan, I guess they are thinking the thinner they spread us out across the world, the less power we will have to dominate at any one specific place.