From: (No Email available)

Date: 2004-11-10 05:25:43

Comment:

Your statistics and opinions once again only depend on a particular point of view.
namely that the war on terror is just about catching and bringing to justice/killing bin laden and his cronies.  Clearly Bush sees the war on terror extending to those who activly harbour terrorists (which Iraq does) and those who condoned the 9/11 atrocities (which Iraq did).  It has been widely claimed that the US and Britain sold Weapons of Mass distruction to Iraq, it was not implausible then that Iraq might still have them so as for being a non-enemy well that is clearly wrong.  America had been blockading Iraq since the first war.  Since 9/11 it was clearly felt that the situation of having such an activly hostile nation in an all ready tense region was untenable.
Essentially the rest of your argument dependes on how much money has been spent on the war on terror basically your putting price on justice.  The reality is this if you choose to fight a war you fight to win that means you spend as much as you can to win the war quickly.
Equally your comment about lives lost is insulting and stupid just because 3000 innocents lost their lives does not equate to casualties in a war fought.  Once again you fight to win.
 Your argument boils down to if only 50 soldiers die and it costs $10000 dollars then the war is ok but if it cosats to much well money is to important to waste,  how very mecenary of you.