What significance did weapons of mass destruction have in the U. S. invasion of Iraq? A. President Bush said that weapons of mass destruction existed there, but that proved not the case.

B. Weapons of mass destruction played no part in the U. S. invasion of Iraq.

C. President Bush threatened to use weapons of mass destruction if the air attack was unsuccessful.

D. So many weapons of mass destruction were discovered in Iraq that it took longer than anticipated to locate all of them.

it was certainly a debatable decision, mainly because it was based primarily on political - and not on legal or social - views. since the congress at that time was led by members of the republican party, and the territory that the tribes wanted to turn into an exclusively indian state was predominantly democratic, the proposal (as expressed in the constitution) did not succeed, but the constitution itself proved to be of crucial importance in the creation of the state of oklahoma, and, most importantly, it guaranteed the involvement of representatives of the indian tribes in the government of the future joint state.  

as a member of congress, i would have voted to ratify the constitution, or at least to have it tabled. ignoring it was an interested and partial decision.