Just curious so I can try to understand your logic. As far as I understand history:

1) WWII we have a collection of countries (Axis) bent on world domination.

2) Current day we have a puny country ran by an evil dictator. He want's nothing to do with terrorists as they have opposite goals and believes from him.

Yet in (2) we attack the dictator. This accomplishes several goals (of the terrorists). Such as giving them a training ground where they can learn better methods of warfare, can practice building better weapons, prove all the talking points of their leader (Bin Laden), so they have no lack of willing new terrorists.

Now of course this is just my take. Please enlighten me on yours.

>Yep.
>
>>You're not comparing our involvement in WWII with that of our current involvement in Iraq are you?
>>
>>>What about WWII? What is your take on that? Worth it? Or should everyone have just acted like the French?