Evan,

I call BS on that because it doesn't account for the people Saddam killed before this war started.

http://www.fas.org/news/iraq/2000/09/iraq-000918.htm

Low estimate  High Estimate
 5,000          5,000 Iranians
 5,000          5,000 Iranians
50,000        100,000 Iraqis
 1,000          1,000 Kuwaitis
30,000         60,000 Iraqis
 1,000         10,000 Iraqis
------        -------
92,000        181,000 Total

There is no doubt to me that the world is better off without Saddam. If you don't think that Saddam moved his biological and chemical weapons capacity out to a friendly nation during the period of non-action of the UN resolutions you are being conned.

Yes it's cost American soldier lives, Iraqi soldiers and some Iraqi civilians. Most of what lives are being lost now are due to centuries old hatred between two religious groups plus outside influences causing trouble with the sole purpose of destabilizing the region.

>>and I wonder how many people Saddam would have killed this month were he still in the position to do so...
>
>The Lancet study shows that the death rate in Iraq was lower pre-invasion.
>
>So more Iraqis and US soldiers would be alive today had George Bush not been elected.

And there is a much greater than zero probability that more American or Iraqi or Iranian or Israeli civilians would be dead right now had we not taken a step towards removing the threat that Saddam posed. I pray that Montreal or Toronto or Vancouver is never attacked, but for you to stand there are gripe about American foreign policy doesn't matter one iota to me. You have one view of the world that is colored in a particular manner by life experiences, politics and the press and I have another. I have a much more black/white outlook on things.. all these shades of gray that are "popular" now are misguided rationalizations of people trying to make themselves feel better about themself.