But as in a cable talk show, the disagreement between the two witnesses did prove to be mildly entertaining, at least for political junkies. The most intriguing sound bite of the day came from Weinberger, who -- despite estimates that a war in Iraq may take up to a quarter of a million American troops -- compared possible military action there to the 1983 American invasion of Grenada. Though the committee heard earlier predictions that American troops would have to stay in Iraq for months or even years after Saddam's departure, Weinberger pointed to the Grenada invasion to suggest the United States could get out of Iraq quickly.

"We went into Grenada with more troops than everybody thought we needed, and we had a very successful operation and prevented the kidnapping and detention of American students, and we got out," he said. "And we got out in something under a month. And a couple of months after that, there was a free election and we have not been back."

Berger offered a Caribbean military reference of his own for a possible U.S. invasion of Iraq, warning that toppling Saddam would be much more difficult than the campaign in Afghanistan. "The Iraqi armed forces are significantly stronger than the Taliban and Saddam Hussein's grip is tighter," he said. "We should be very wary of turning the U.S. military into an emergency rescue squad if Saddam Hussein moves his tanks against insurgents we are backing. America does not need a Bay of Pigs in the Persian Gulf."

The two also disagreed about whether or not President Bush should consult with Congress before launching a military strike against Iraq. Weinberger said it is "always desirable to have congressional support," but said the president has "very substantial freedom to do the things that he considers necessary in foreign policy." Berger, by contrast, said: "Congress becomes, as always, the vehicle for expressing American public support. And we've learned in the past that without sustained American public support, we can get ourselves in trouble."

The most heated exchange between the two came over the timeline of a possible U.S. strike. Weinberger called for swift action against Saddam, while Berger endorsed a more measured approach. The former national security advisor said Bush should go back to the United Nations to call upon Saddam to allow weapons inspectors back into Iraq "to serve our purpose of gaining some greater support in the world for an action we may have to take."

Weinberger dismissed the diplomatic route, saying Saddam "had four years in which he has succeeded in throwing out an absolute U.N. resolution. And asking for it again is asking for more useless promises from him."

For all of the lively back-and-forth, one thing became clear at the end of this second day of hearings. There will be no meaningful congressional hearings about Iraq until some current employees of the executive branch make their way to Capitol Hill. That's not expected to happen until fall, at the earliest.

Recent Stories