>As you might suspect, I could not disagree with you more. After watching Saddam's Bombmaker last night on the History Channel, I am even more convinced. If he is allowed to stay in power, there is a significant risk to this country, his neighbors, and his own people. Simply ignoring the problem will not make it go away.
>
SNIP
Chris,

Where does it end though??? ANY country, at any time, could be adjudged to be "a significant risk to this country"!

Is France borderline on the list yet?...Is Germany ahaead of them?...Is Canada on the way up the list now that it has questioned the outrightly stated objective of 'regime change' in Iraq?...Is Saudi Arabia because it is not 'a democracy' and/or because 15 of its nationals were 9/11 attackers and/or because they have oil?...Is Bahrain because it does not have 'a democracy' and/or because it has oil?...Is Qatar because it does not have 'a democracy' and/or because it has oil?...Is Kuwait because it does not have 'a democracy' and/or because it has oil?...Is Turkey because their parliament is being 'uppity' by listening to its people and voting accordingly [and if so, what IS the value of 'democracy'?]?...Is Yemen, just because???

I really really really thought that we were now a little more humane and sophisticated than to use war as an option at any time any more, save when attacked in the first place.
Now it is true that the U.S. was attacked on 9/11. And the admitted perpetrator and his supporters were attacked BACK after several attempts to have UBL handed over failed, and Afghanistan is now said to be on the road to "recovery".
9/11 has not given ANYONE a license to war just because they are fearful.