cicerone imposter wrote:I'm sure that the leader of North Korea doesn't fit that description.
The leader of North Korea
does fit that description. Unfortunately, we signed a treaty with him in which he agreed not to develop nuclear weapons, but he lied, and so now he has them, or, at least, claims to. Therefore, invasion now could result in the instantaneous deaths of millions. We allowed that particular dictator to make himself invulnerable. We didn't want to let Hussein achieve that.
cicerone imposter wrote:Tell that to the Iraqi people. They seem very angry with the occupation just now, or haven't you heard? Rummie told us the Iraqi's would welcome us with open arms and flowers in the streets. What happened? The UN did not have the will to act? They were in Iraq inspecting to find Saddams WMDS, and they couldn't find any.
Unfortunately, the second difficult thing was ill planned and not justified by anybody's standard of war - except the Bushies administration.
In some cases, one WMD can kill up to a million people, and most WMD can be smuggled into western countries with relative ease. This makes them something that a person like Hussein cannot be allowed to possess. The inspections had been going on for 12 years, and Hussein had been playing cat and mouse games with the inspectors, and had been caught in lies more than once. After long denying that he had a bioweapons program, Hussein finally admitted that he did and that it had produced more than 2100 gallons of anthrax, but he did so only after his son-in-law, who had partcicipated in the program, defected and provided evidence. Hussein had had WMD, he had lied about them, and he had used them. The only question was how recently. And, I shall remind you, just in passing, that he was a brutal tyrant who murdered a million of his own people, and tortured them routinely. The war was completely justified.
cicerone imposter wrote:It's turned into a quagmire with no end in sight; costing almost 700 American lives and billions of tax dollars.
It's only a quagmire to someone who expects all wars to last a few months, be inexpensive, and never run into difficulties, but not by comparison with significant past wars. While every death in war is tragic, the casualty number you quote is extremely low compared to all but the smallest wars of recent history. You seem to believe that we should never fight wars that are difficult, but only ones that are quick, surgical, perfectly planned, and in which we have a strategy for immediate exit.
cicerone imposter wrote:What has WWII have anything to do with Iraq? Since you can't remember, Japan attacked American soil. That was a declaration of war.
You said that Bush was evil for starting a war that resulted in 10,000 deaths. Most wars, including WW2, result in thousands or millions of deaths.