I supported Iraq2--at first. WMD was the only justification we had to go over there. I believe most of the American people felt the same way.

But what happened later was that support of the war became an indicator of ideology. People who agreed with Bush on other things did not want him to be shown wrong on this...it threatened the rest of their political world view (mostly on domestic and economic agendas). It made thgeir man, hence, their side, look bad.

Much the same happened in Viet Nam. Stopping Communist expansion in Asia was a realistic reason to go to war there. Once it became clear that there was no Communist plan to take over the Western Pacific Rim, and once it further became obvious that the war was failing to stop that from happening anyway, even if it were true, then continuing to fight was just futile. It became merely a way for LBJ, and later Nixon, and their supporters to save face.

As for "Why doesn't France do it?" Because they know we have more resources, and they would rather have us spend ours than they spend theirs. Old age and treachery will beat youth and skill every time. And we fall for it every time.

Ain't it funny how when presented with the exact same data we have arrived at totally different conclusions?
That is what is really the key thing to take away from all this.