you know what, if you want to say we shouldn't attack iraq because:
1.) They are no threat to us,
2.) We cannot pre-emptively strike a country with so little information as to wrongdoing,
3.)The like (heck, I'll throw in the desire for international consensus before action in this part)
I'm cool with that. You go. However, if your reason for war is "Have we learned nothing from terrorism? Isn't war terrorism? We cannot stoop to the level of those who have attacked us in the past... (Rosie O'Donnell)" you are completely out of touch with the reality of international affairs. If anything, I think this whole situation has proved the existence of the anarchic state of international relations. Look, god knows I don't want to die, and I would never want to be put in that situation, but in the event that we are provoked, a diplomatic solution ends and a much more horrible solution must begin. Not to wave the bloody flag of the Munich Pact, and we are certainly not at this point in Iraq, a situation where even I wonder why we are so proactive about this whole thing, but you have to just recognize the potential need to use that military we spend so much of our GDP on relative to other nations.
