"Wrong. It has EVERYTHING to do with our security. Taking reasonable, prudent measures to protect our security trumps every other consideration, including respecting the national sovergnty of some little crappy dictatorship like Saddam's regime or trying to please do-nothings at the UN."

Again, this just doesnt wash. It is NOT in security interests to conduct a war that will be judged as un-just. It is entirely antithetical to the needs of our larger war on terrorism. It is counterproductive in the sense that it is isolating us at the time we are engaged in a war that absolutely REQUIRES the cooperation and good will of other nation states. We can't put police on the street corner in Jakarta, Pakistan etc... But Jakarta, Pakistan etc can....

In addition, Iraq does not pose a clear and present danger- it simply does not. There is nothing more or less threatening about Iraq than 4 years ago, or 10 years ago. Nothing has changed.

matt:
"How do we know that Saddam hasn't secretly passed WMD to terrorist groups already? The danger that he has or will do so if far too geat for us to ignore or wish away."

Again, by this argument, why are we not just as concerned about Libya, Syria or Egypt? All are much more friendly with terrorists, Esp Libya and Syria. We have SOLID evidence that these guys wrote the book on training terrorist organizations.

matt:
"It's completely inaccurate to portray the upcoming US and UK military action as a preemptive strike. "

The ratcheting up of the Iraq situation coincided with the release of the "Bush Doctrine", where the US reseves the right to wage pre-emptive war unilaterally. We claim that Iraq is a clear and present danger, yet we have no visible threat and we revise national doctrine to allow unilateral pre-emptive use of force without imminent attack? If this does not make this pre-emptive, then what does, pray tell?

matt:
"And Saddam's belligerence definitely endangers the US, more so every day that passes with Saddam's attempts to acquire and develop WMD"

He has been acquiring and developing and testing WMD for 30 years, He used them on the iranians. He won't use them on us because he knows there will be only 2 results- Him dead and out of power or him rotting in a cell in helsinki and out of power. He didn't use WMD in Gulf I because he knew we would do a hell of alot more than kick him out of Kuait! He is contained, he is no more a threat then Libya, Syria, Egypt or China.

"It would be wonderful if everyone in the civilized world would love us and applaud our every move. But we can't worry
ourselves too much if they don't, "

This is not correct. Again, if we wage what is seen as in illegetimate war, we WILL be cast in the same coffin as the Nazis. This will devastate our ability to wield power all over the world at the time we desperately need that ability to fight radical islamist terrorist groups.

"Saddam has quite amply demonstrated his evil nature. He has attacked the United States, directly by attempting to assassinate former President Bush, and indirectly by hosting and sheltering terrorists in Iraq, "

Evil nature: Yes, he is an evil scumbag like every other dictator with a grudge and a WMD.

Hosting and sheltering....:
Don't buy it. Yes, I buy the WMD- Buit nagain, Libya and Syria we KNOW have done this. Our evidence on Iraq is really thin here.

Again, none of this survives the wash...

Davin