The military headed for Baghdad, and at the same time headed for the oil fields. The difference is that the military preserved, protected and preserved the oil fields.

And in Baghdad nothing was preserved, protected or preserved. Not the museums, not the universities, not the hospitals, not the police records, not the civil records. When that was pointed out to Rumsfeld, he said "Stuff happens." But not in the oil fields if American lives can protect it. Some way to "liberate" a country from oppression, huh? Clearly "liberation" wasn't any part of the agenda if one judges by the actions and not the words.

Intensive, expensive search for WMDs. Nothing. More searches. Nothing. Too many people involved now to lie about it.

There is nothing in the above which isn't true and verifiable. There is nothing more which is particularly relevant, unless it's the willingness of Bush-Cheney-Rice to lie in order to steal and cheat in an illegal war. (Only by grasping at the thinnest of hairs, equivalent to a belief in crop dusters flying from ships off the American coast, as if we couldn't have found them, can the True Believers claim that invasion was legal under international law.)

And trusting his C-in-C, the "decider", ol' "MISSION ACCOMPLISHED", my cousin died.

Were his Supreme Commanders worthy? Did they exercise due diligence before using the ultimate remedy? Was the US threatened? Was the agenda in the national interest?

Are the results worth one young, dedicated American life? One maimed-for-life kid?

As I said, it takes a brave person to claim it was, to defend those actions. To defend that which is ultimately indefensible.