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:

What does it mean if Saudi Arabia ends up backing the Sunnis in Iraq?

Jack, It's really quite simple: if Saudi Arabia gets involved, so does Iran openly and then Syria and Israel and Turkey and Jordan. Then the U.S would really have an interest in the region - we would have been the catalyst for World War III. This is just like WW II, too many entangling alliances!
Wayne, Oakwood Hills, Illinois

It means that we now know who is really running this country: oil and the Saudis.
Lou, Sanford, Florida

It's amazing. Just when you think it can't get any worse, Pres. Bush says we should send in more troops and countries in the Middle East commit to escalating regional conflicts. Which will destroy the world first, this war or global warming?
Rudy, Columbus, Ohio

It means we had better get busy with our alternative fuels program and quit just talking about it.
Phil, Mesa, Arizona

You think they are not supporting them right now?
Taye, Lexington, Kentucky

How will history judge President Bush?

If somehow, unlikely as it looks, the Iraq war has some kind of positive ending, he will be remembered for being a good leader who helped pull us together after 9-11.
Dennis, Kokomo, Indiana

Unless future history books completely distort the facts, he will be viewed as the least popular, most devious president the U.S. ever had.
Patricia, Washington, Illinois

History is but a bag of tricks we play on the dead. In short, it really depends who is writing the history of our times some 25, or 30 years from now. It also will reflect what will ultimately happen in the Middle East, North Korea, and our nation. Presently, Bush is following the same pattern of dislike as such presidents as Truman and even Lincoln.
John, Poughkeepsie, New York

History will remember Bush as the president who set us back 50 years in diplomacy. Can't wait until the end of his term.
Michelle, Yakima, Washington

House Democrats are considering an independent ethics panel. Will it ever happen?

An independent ethics panel is an idea whose time has come. Republican and Democratic office holders, especially those in the U.S. Congress, are sorely in need of an ethical transfusion… Are they sincere, or only attempting to defuse public outrage regarding constant unethical behavior by members of the Congress?
Al, Fresno, California

Congress is generally bankrupt in ethics; how can a group of the same regulate anybody? I doubt the Democrats will regulate ethics. Some of their early appointments for committee chairpersons indicate poor decision-making capabilities, but strong politics.
Sammy, Pt. Pleasant, West Virginia

A congressional ethics oversight agency won't happen because it isn't constitutional. That's the job of the media. That's your job.
William

Let me put it this way, Jack. If they don't clean up Congress in the next year or so, then we need to launch a third party for 2008. That may be the only way we'll ever get these idiots in Washington of either party to sit up and pay attention to us.
David, Louisville, Kentucky