All this Tonkin stuff sounds familiar...

Maybe it is because it has happened again. President Bush, always an advocate for pre-emption, went into Iraq and increased military force because of the United States' fear of weapons of mass destruction (WMDs). But perhaps those WMDs did not even exist.

"North Vietnamese gunboats did not attack U.S. warships in the Gulf of Tonkin, anymore than Saddam threatened to attack us with his nonexistent WMDs," said Arnaud de Borchgrave in a Washington Times article.

When action in Congress started to stir in 2002, there was similar debate about invading Iraq over the threat of WMDs. Some were all for pre-emption, others -- mainly Sen. Robert Byrd (D- West Virginia) -- remembered the past.

"Let's go back to the war in Vietnam," said Byrd. "I was here. I was one of the Senators who voted for the Gulf of Tonkin resolution. Yes, I voted for the Gulf of Tonkin resolution. I am sorry for that. I am guilty of doing that. I should have been one of the two, or at least I should have made it three, Senators who voted against that Gulf of Tonkin resolution. But I am not wanting to commit that sin twice, and that is exactly what we are doing here. This is another Gulf of Tonkin resolution" (Elliot).

If this is, in fact, another Gulf of Tonkin -- which led to one of the bloodiest wars the United States has ever been a part of -- why the hell are we still in Iraq?