"T. Early" wrote in message
...

I'd suggest that your classification of Saddam as "merely an
irritating regime" raises serious questions about your credibility in
the area of geopolitics.



There are and will always be governments we don't like, everywhere in the
world. Unless there is truly genocide going on, it's up to the locals to
deal with it. Saddam was once an ally of the US. In fact, an argument can
easily be made that the U.S. created Saddam in the first place. At any rate,
what is worse? A brutal but local dictatorship, or a superpower that
cowardly bombs and kills thousands in a third world country, using standoff
weapons from high up in the air or from ships at sea where the crews remain
safe and cozy? Can such a country really claim higher moral authority?

I still maintain that Saddam Hussein's regime was, for the U.S., just
another irritating but relatively harmless one (compared to others) -
harmless, except perhaps in terms of oil supply, which is probably the real
reason the US administration acted as it did, when you strip away all the
spin and propaganda.