"Are you including the cost of 9/11 in your computation"

Non sequitur. What does Iraq have to do with 9/11 and it price?

"Are you including that fact that the US is left in the position of being blamed for the fate of poor people in Iraq?"

And do you think it will be cheaper to be blaimed for the thousands that will soon die in Iraq, both in and out of uniform, in the next few months?

"Another really basic point; one I don't even you can understand: the US is paying these costs, don't you think that this gives the US a certain "right" to decide what alternative ways it acheive it's objective?"

Gbaikie, this is the first time you have gotten personal... I thought more of you.

But, to answer your (non)point:

Sure, it gives us a right. But do you honestly wish to say that it entitles us to take any action we desire? This makes no sense... by thias argument we could set up death camps and/or nuke Iraq back to the stone age. We of course are entilted to free action, but it does not give us free reign to anything we wan't- its the same basic constraints on freedom that differentiates it from anarchy and a hobbsian state of nature.

"It seems to me that if other countries wanted to be entitled a say in the matter they would be spending money to support it."

I see, so the scores of Billions that they spent PAYING US BACK for the gulf war, or the piles of money they LOOSE (France, Germany and Russia aside) from Iraq being an economic non-entity don't add up to a say? The billions of dollars they spend on charity programs to make sure Saddam does not use the sanctions to completely stamp out the Iraqi population? That amounts to no say?

"Now even it they were spending money it wouldn't really alter the US right to do what it thought was in there security interest, but it would lend some creditable is these other countries objections."

This argument verges on lunacy. So China could decide, in a vacuum, that owning the ENTIRE Korean peninsula was in its security interst and NOBODY has the right to say otherwise? Again, I dare you to pose a convincing argument that this really is in our security interests in the first place. China would have no clear reason to do so, but neither do we in Iraq. China would be wrong in doing this, but so are we in what we are doing! What about Russia? Okay, maybe we are right and they are wrong, So why don't you/can't you prove it? What is our compelling national self defense or reasonable casus belli here?

If we are going to hop around the world taking down whoever we choose without any clear justification for doing so that hinges on real claims of national security, what does that make us? Would/will other countries deal with us? Will they not seek to undermine us at every turn? This is what we are walking into!

"subvertively working against sanctions and taking "bribes" in term of taking Saddem sweet deals "

Okay, and we are offering no bribes, yes? 32 billion to turkey?

"Also some people are eager to point out that the US has *some* responsiblity for supporting the current Iraq regime, strangely they then flip around claiming the US has no responsibility towards Iraq. In other words they want to beat us with the responsiblity stick (blame us) then object to the US actually taking responsibility. "

Ahh, I see, so we have the obligation to make war on the dictators we placed in power and kill the people that those dictators are oppressing? I don't hear anyone taking responsibility for supporting this madman. Rumsfeld was even sent by a previous administration to give this man our good tidings. Likewise, I hear nearly NO ONE asking us to take reponsibility for getting this monster into power. (I personally don't think we are entirely responsible for his presence, just complicit at best)

"Frontier America made us a nation that valued action over words. The day America is unwilling to change the world is the day America declines as the world power (and joins the decadent "Old Europe Club"). Of course, this is a very liberal (small "L") concept, which the Conservative Repubican are pushing and the conservative (small "C")Democrats are fighting like mad. [And this isn't about Bush, this has been going on for decades]."

And all of this is purely off-topic.

Davin L.