Okaaaaay... Then I do not see how your response was relevent to that question.

>That is exactly my point
>
>>Odd, I thought you're point was that Iraq needed liberation, but the US was not the one to do it.
>>
>>>Why the US?
>>>
>>>The point is that the United States, for the first time in her history,
>>>premvtively attacked another sovereign nation - and without justifiable
>>>cause. It was a criminal act. Even the UN said so.
>>>
>>>Instead of causing good, it caused harm. 35,000 Iraqi civilians dead,
>>>1800 US troops dead, and yes, untold militants dead. And now no end in sight.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>>Who then? France?
>>>>
>>>>>I'm not arquing that Saddam Hussien was a bad guy, or that Iraq needed
>>>>>liberation.
>>>>>
>>>>>I'm arguing that it had to be the US to do it.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>>>Summary: We attacked Iraq for no reason.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>Not true.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> They were not involved.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>Mostly true.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>I think the recent UN scandals regarding the Oil-for-food program have clearly demonstrated that the UN had NO chance of making the sanctions against and resolutions regarding Iraq work. We have since found out the covert reasons Russia, France and Germany were against liberating Iraq. Just follow the money. Not to mention the enormous graves of mass murder victims of his regime.