[quote="Dr. Deleto":72963][quote="Sgt Stryker":72963]The war against the Taliban was 100% justified,
what was the reason Bush gave for going into Iraq?
phantom WMDs?
even the "Saddam is an evil dictator" reason is a better one that the official reason.

I hate Saddam as much as the next guy, but because Iraqis are being opressed doesn't make it right to send in US soldiers and trade US lives for Iraqi lives.
the US military exists to protect the security of Americans, therefore exterminating the Taliban to the last raghead was a good idea, because they posed a threat.
[/quote:72963]

Us interests....hm....Israel comes to mind. Right in that general area and the target of countless attacks both physical and non physical, by Sadam's regime. Also, lets think about the other big reason behind the Iraq campaign. OIL! I personally use it myself, now I don't know if you have an electric car or just ride a bike, but I do know that a lot of the US' oil comes out of that region (some from Iraq itself.) So now, instead of having to pay a "Sadam Tax on ever barrel from Iraq, we will have little or no taxes added on, since the new power will most likely be put into place by us.

Saying that we have no interests or justification in that war is the same as saying we shouldnt have helped France or England in world war 2. What exactly was Germany doing to Englan at the time on our intervention anyways? shooting missles at them and bombing them? sounds awfully familiar to the "Accidents" that Sadam ordered against Israel. Sure we know now that Germany was planning to invade England, but how do we know that sadam didnt have that same thing in mind for some of our allies in that region? We know for a fact he was building an army out of weapons that we told him he couldnt have after desert storm. His defiance of the rules we layed out was enough for me, but the other facts are strong in themselves.

Lets face it, Sadam was an asshat that deserved what he got, and in actuality, if you really want to compare death ratios, then the numbers in Iraq, had they been back in the US, would have had twice as many die in car wrecks, shootings, etc. I have a friend who has just recently returned from Iraq. He was assigned to the 101st airborne, then the marines (he's a 12bravo with the army) and he told me that most of the time he felt safer there than he does everyday at home.[/quote:72963]

I honestly believe Israel could take Iraq on their own easily.
Their air force is better trained than our own.
In the 80s when they needed to blow up an Iraqi nuclear reactor they did it with 2 F-16s flying under the radar.
The US needed a mass attack by stealth fighters (F-117) to kill Iraq's SAMs first. Also Iraq's military is such a shambles we didn't even do a preliminary bombardment like last time before the ground war.

How can you compare Germany and Iraq?
Did Saddam have a plan for Iraqi superiority over other races?
Is Iraq anywhere near the industrial powerhouse that Germany always was?
Remember that the treaty of Versailles only knocked Germany down, not out, they still had very much intact industry (mostly idle before Hitler came) and they had some of the most brilliant minds of our time (Von Braun for example). (some of whom fled the country like Einstein)

What am I supposed to think when I see a regular lab centrifuge on TV and they tell me Saddam was using THAT to build nukes. (any idiot knows you need a gas centrifuge to separate UF6 (the UF6 with U-238 is heavier))

Like I said before I would be 100% for the war if it was not for the way Bush and company made up total bullshit to try and convince us.