We've learned a lot about stopping terrorism

The voluminous report on intelligence lapses prior to the Sept. 11, 2001, terrorist attacks on in New York, Pennsylvania and Washington, D.C., provides little new light on the failures in communications that became so evident in the days and weeks after the al-Qaida strikes.

Indeed, the just released findings of a congressional inquiry would be of little interest if it weren't for new questions that surround intelligence information used to argue the case of the war in Iraq. As a result, it is important not to blend the two scenarios in a way that relies on assumptions from two years ago to cloud inquiries, official and otherwise, into the successful effort to depose Saddam Hussein and destroy his maniacal regime.

The official report on the 9-11 attacks was completed in December. Making the report public has been delayed by the declassification process. Some of the report, particularly portions that might shed light on the sponsorship of terrorism by other Mideastern governments, remains top secret.

The report confirmed, as had been widely reported, that there were good indications prior to 9-11 that terrorists were living and plotting in the U.S. However, there was no smoking gun that might have captured the attention of various agencies. The problem was that each agency only had pieces of information that didn't mean much until put together.

It's easy to look back at the events leading up to any infamous activity and point to indicators that are clear only in light of what transpired. The question is whether this hindsight provides useful information to prevent a similar set of circumstances from becoming yet another day of infamy.

In the case of terrorist attacks on the United States, the answer appears to be that we have learned from the gaps in intelligence that prevented the our national security agencies from detecting specific details of plans to use jetliners as flying bombs. There have been no more terrorism within our borders.

That's not to say it won't happen again. The hallmark of terrorism is that it doesn't play by the rules. Our nation's borders are more secure than they were two years ago, and those safeguards can be given some of the credit for the fact that there have been no more attacks. But terrorists intent on doing others harm with no regard for their own lives can always find a way to create mayhem.

It is against this backdrop of pre-9-11 intelligence weaknesses that many Americans are judging the information that compelled the Bush administration to pursue a war in Iraq.

But the questions now appear to have more political motivation than anything else.

The fact remains that Saddam Hussein was engaged in genocide, corruption and financial abuses. He was harboring terrorists, defying U.N. directives and threatening the delicate balance of power in the Mideast. He was capable of both developing and using chemical and biological weapons against Iraqis as well as his enemies.

Questions about intelligence reports that Saddam Hussein tried to buy uranium in Africa or that the Iraqi dictator had weapons of mass destruction do little to prevent future terrorism. Rather, these questions are intended only to discredit the Bush administration. In the process, politically motivated criticism is detracting the nation from issues that deserve attention and action.