It's largely agreed that Richard Perle, Donald Rumsfeld, and Paul Wolfowitz were the architects and cheerleaders for "pre-emptive" (in quotes because it implies that Iraq had the ability to launch an attack against the U.S.) war against Iraq. Perle's conflict of interest arose when he intimated that he could create such a war in exchange for a business arrangement/investment. He created such a war. So, how is it that, after the fact, resigning will remove the appearance of impropriety? I mean...doesn't it create the appearance of impropriety? He got the investors he wanted. He influenced the war he promised. Resigning now implies that he's "closing out the books". Want to make it look better? Don't resign...return the investment.