On "The Situation Room" today, we asked viewers the following questions, and here are some of our favorite responses that we didn't get to read on air:

Was Iraq better off under Saddam Hussein?

I don't think Iraq was necessarily better off with Saddam, but the U.S. definitely was! He kept Iran in check and focused their attention on fighting each other, not the U.S. I guess Iraqis did have schools, hospitals, electricity, running water and a police force under Saddam, however.
Elie, Allentown, Pennsylvania

Yes. With Saddam in power, we had him to keep Iran in check, to keep the Shias from turning the country into a theocracy, to keep al Qaeda out of Iraq, and to keep his citizens from killing each other. He was a bad guy to be sure, but we traded one bad guy for thousands of bad guys.
Jenny, New York

Iraq was not better off under Saddam Hussein. The people of Iraq had no hope, no choices and no freedom. Now they have all the above. The U.S. is not better off now than when Saddam ruled Iraq, but someone had to pay the price for freedom.
Maurice, Wisconsin

Though Saddam Hussein's method of governance was reprehensible, it's become evident that he was the glue that held Iraq together.
Karla, East Wenatchee, Washington

It does not matter if you are killed under the rule of a dictator or self proclaimed "liberators." But under Saddam, at least you knew where the threat came from; now you face wholesale random killing.
Andre

What does it mean if the U.S. threatened to bomb Pakistan "back to the Stone Age" unless it cooperated in the war on terror?

It means that Pakistan just peeled back another layer of this administration's tactics exposing our elected officials as ruthless, ego-maniacal, world-invasive bullies. Is there anything more the Bush administration can do to tarnish our image?
Nikki, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania

What does it mean? It means this administration thinks it rules the world! How sad for America we let this continue.
Pat, Butte, Montana

"Bomb them back to the Stone Age" sounds like it fits right in with Texas gunslinger diplomacy. It's kind of like we're "gonna get 'em dead or alive." I have no problem believing this was an ultimatum given to Pakistan.
Gary, Yuba City, California

Would you give up sex if you could live to be 100?

Jack, What kind of question is that? I am married you idiot!
Richard, La Belle, Florida

Jack. The sex thing. Do you need to know right now, or can I decide when I'm 80?
Jim, Wilmington, North Carolina

I thought I gave up sex at 25, when I got married.
Shane, Ontario

Too easy, Jack. I'm married so I don't get to have sex anymore. Although I will not live to be 100 years old, it sure will seem like it.
Craig, Tampa, Florida

What a delightful change from your usual questions. As for me, Jack, I still plan to be having sex when I'm 100.
Bill, Casa Grande, Arizona