Secrets of Saddam: Reveal, or Conceal?

Challenged by skeptics at home and abroad, the Bush administration plans to make public next week details about Iraq's weapons programs that have not been given to U.N. inspectors.

Secretary of State Colin Powell will make the presentation at the United Nations next Wednesday and meet with the foreign ministers of most if not all 14 other members of the U.N. Security Council, a senior U.S. official said.

In determining what evidence to present, which could include photographs, the administration's goal is to convince other nations and the American public that Iraq has concealed weapons of mass destruction.

But a photograph that is meaningful to intelligence officers may appear to an untrained observer as simply a bunch of rooftops, said the official, speaking on condition of anonymity.

Secrets of Saddam: reveal, or conceal?

A sample of your responses:

Get real now.   Do we really want to give our intelligence to Security Council members like France, Germany, Syrian Arab Republic, Pakistan, China, and Russia?  These nations are not with us on this.... and will only come over to our side once we declare war against Iraq and Pres. Bush once again says the magic words..."you're either with us.... or you're with them".
Wayne H.
Sugar Land, TX

Yes, the Administration should provide sufficient evidence to the global community that Saddam:  1) is in material breech of the UN resolution, 2) continues to develop his WMD capabilities, and 3) is linked to Al Qaeda, This disclosure need not be a comprehensive disclosure.  Any disclosure should be made without compromising sources and methods and without endangering U.S. personnel or sources.
Joe W.
Amelia Island, FL

I don't believe we should reveal much of anything more.  I do not want any of our people put in danger.  I believe that this is simply an opportunity for the countries who aren't on board to get smart. 
Donna
Corpus Christi, TX

I dont think we need to show any more evidence. Saddam's history and past shows enough. I wonder how many people that wanted President Bush in 1991 to march into Bagdad, don't want any attack now? Give the inspectors as much time as OUR joint chiefs of Staff need and then make sure there's nothing left to inspect.
Mike Z.
Batavia, NY

Information that can be released without hurting National Security or endanger informant Lives should be provided only. The protection of US Informants and Surveillance techniques should be protected at all cost. A certain amount of trust must excepted by the people of the US that the administration is being honest about having the information but is unable to release it due to National Security or personal safety of informants.
Bob L.
US Navy Retired
VA Beach, VA

The dilemma on what information to give out without endangering the sources is to give whatever information you want then attack.
Steve    
Omaha, NE

The bottom line is that most Americans want to be assured that going to war with Iraq is the right thing to do.  If the "compelling evidence" is too sensitive to share with the public however, then we should trust our lawmakers in Congress to make the decision through an official declaration of war.
Lisa W.
Fremont, CA

- Send your comments to: friends@foxnews.com

FOX and Friends' Question of the Day is brought to you by .

- Note: The views and opinions expressed on this page do not necessarily reflect those of FOX News or its subsidiaries