With regards to casualty comparisons, weve covered the death vs. injured and Im not sure where the total casualty rate falls – I suspect Iraq should be far less since “military operations” ended a long time ago.

I think we recognized the jihadi problem after the 2nd plane hit WTC. Iraq has done nothing more than stick our noses directly in the beehive (you suggest this is a good thing). I dont agree with the counter-Jihadi activity justifies casualties in Iraq. We were fighting Jihadis in Afghanistan before Iraq – had the Jihadis escalated action in another country (like Iraq) and we got dragged in, so be it – if a foreign sovereignty was supporting Jihadis against the US and we responded militarily, so be it. Iraq didnt fit the bill. No matter how you want to skew it,Iraq was a mistake – I just want to know how big a mistake and how far reaching so we can put in curbs to avoid it in the future.

If we do not question our govt on issues like this, we dont deserve any rights. This is exactly what makes our country great.

I don’t agree.

The war is not going badly. There is no mess. The objective facts belie the “sky is falling” mantra the press keeps repeating: our casualties are unprecedently low (based on virtually any comparison, Vietnam, Korea, WWII, you might make); for the 1st time in its 5K year history Iraq has a constitution and, after two elections (with much higher turnout than American norms) is on the way to becoming the first Arab democracy; Syria has withdrawn from Lebanon; Saddam Hussein is on trial; and most important the Jihadi threat to civilization has finally been openly recognized and confronted. You cannot solve a problem until you recognize you have one. We’ve had a Jihadi problem for a long long time and we’re finally doing something about it.

Even if our casualties were higher the value of that last point would not be outweighed.

We beat this one in the Joe W debate. Am i reading the same material as you?

“Of course there were doubts. Powell was openly skeptical. But the intel we had was enough to make both Clintons, Kennedy, Biden, Kerry, and all the rest express exactly the sentiments Bush did when he took us into Iraq.” – Youve also stated you had doubts about going to war with Iraq.

Does it bother you that the October 2002 NIE report (with dissenting opinions)and is markedly different from the unclassified summary. If you do further research, the October 2002 report is significantly more emphatic than prior intelligence briefs prepared by Tenet, yet, no additional intel was presented prior to the October preparation.

Do we know what the Congress was given as evidence for review prior to preparing and voting on:

HJ Res 75
http://www.cooperativeresearch.org/archive/2001/uscongress122001.htm

Whats further emphasized in the resolution is exhausting diplomacy before war. Saddam released an updated report that was scowled at by the White House. Clearly, Saddam had no way out – HJ Res 75 wasnt worth the paper it was printed on – we were invading.

To suggest the rest of the world came to the same conclusions is ridiculous – what intel did they have to conclude this. What everyone concluded was that Saddam did not allow complete, unfettered inspections and we can only presume he still has weapons if not ambitions (these guys would be great asbestos or lead-based paint inspectors with that attitude).

Did this justify invasion? I think we found out where most of the world stood.

“What’s ridiculous is the charge that Bush distorted reality to take us to war. It is the Ds who are distorting reality right now by forgetting what they said and believed. It’s so incredibly lame an argument it’s hard to believe anyone thinks it needs refuting.”

It is ridiculous to charge Bush with anything at this time. All the documents Bush had access to are not available for debate. We have no idea what the White House had access to, no idea what influence the White House had on reporting. What we do know is that an NIE report, “supposedly” prepared with NO outside influence, grossly overstated the Iraq threat.

What we still need to find out is if the intel prepared and presented to Congress was as complete as the intel the White House had access to in preparing to go to war.

The only way an investigation of this magnitude is accomplished is through politics – the same politics that pushed us into war in the first place.

As Ive stated in the past, either Bush misled the congress & the people or they were incompetent. I need to expand that statement to include the Congress. Looks like the left wing err right wing libertarian anti-war loonies like Ron Paul were right after all:

http://www.why-war.com/news/2002/10/11/debating.html