On your last...

I am utterly convinced that Powell DID, in fact, believe Saddam to pose the threat that the Administration claimed. I am ALSO convinced that he was 100% against the manner in which the Administration was conducting the preperation and prosecution of the conflict, from Jan. '02 to the end of his term as SoS... he saw, understood and could do NOTHING about the mistakes that Cheney, Rummy, Tennent and (by extension) Bush were making.

Lest we forget, the man was "on the ground" for nearly a month in Iraq in '91 (total, that is). He knew, first hand, the level of tyrany that Saddam maintained in the country before, during and after the conflict... and I am sure (without doubt, actually) that is SoS he saw that nothing had changed in Iraq for the better SINCE 1991. No, he KNEW that Saddam HAD owned, maintained and USED chemical means to kill as many as 100,000 Kurds, Iranians and Iraqis from 1984 to 1991. For him, believing in the fudged numbers and intel was a small step.

If he has "sour grapes" its over the preperation and prosecution of the War in Iraq, and with the manner in which his concerns (as valid and pertinent as anyones in the Administration at the time... he WAS a "four-star" AND the SecState for Christ's sake!) were disregarded at nearly every turn.

This doesn't negate Ryan's initial observation though... that Powell's endorsement isn't simply to the "other side of the aisle" and plain opposition to Bush's policies and practices. It is an endorsement of American appeasement politics in the face of national crisis.

A "four-star" and former SoS should know better than that.