now we are talking about moral implications of possible potential lives lost vs the actual dead people we killed.

There are such moral implications, difficult ones, and they need to be faced. Policemen face them every time they go into a hostage situation.

It is not speculation, it is a certainty, that had Saddam and Sons stayed in power, they would have killed far more people than died in the war. Their record speaks for itself, and the numbers are easy to project. There is absolutely nothing to indicate that suddenly they would change to benevolent and harmless leaders.

It is not speculation, it is a certainty, that he would have continued looting aid and oil money, and killing children and others by neglect. This is not fortune telling. It is no more fortune telling than predicting that a brick dropped from a building will hit the ground.

I don't know how you came up with the idea that somehow killing a few people--by accident--while stopping a mass murderer is inherently immoral. Regrettable, certainly. And the ideal would have been a magic spell that would turn all the Baathists into frogs, but until something like that comes along, we have to use the tools we have.

Now, if you want to argue from the point that even if a leader is annihilating his people, we have no right to interfere, we can discuss that. It is certainly controversial, and has a lot of ramifications.

But once one interferes, the short-term losses need to be realistically weighed against long-term gains. WWII inflicted far more damage on nations freed from dictators than we inflicted on Iraq. In fact, many millions of civilians died as a direct result of the warfare, and the equation balancing those who Hitler or the Japanese would have murdered in future regimes, with those noncombatants who died from the Allies freeing them, would be even harder than with Iraq.

But how many Europeans think it would have been preferable to leave Hitler in charge of Europe?

BTW. How can Iraq be both Greedo and a bunch of dead little boys?

Uh...more than one analogy can be equally accurate. Maybe you should have gone to seminary school.