I have two family members over in Iraq now. I also have several freinds who are likely to be sent over there soon. Finally, I myself will probably end up serving over there with the US Navy, assuming the conflict is still going on 5 years from now. (After high school and 4-year) college is when I'm joining. All of us fully support it.

Most Iraqis are not terrorists and would resent you for saying such.

Most Iraqis support the US actions. Look at the reactions to the original invasion. People going nuts in the streets, tearing down statues of Saddam, presenting soldiers with gifts, etc. For some reason, that strikes me as evidence that many support American involvement.

Those were the original responces
Not the way the people are feeling now
The US brought an end to a few years of peace, peace that was bought at a high price, but peace none the less.
Now the army is stirring up a Civil War
This is the biggest cock-up since the vietnam War. Not every solution involves Democracy and Imperialistic-Military actions.

The Army is not "stirring up" a civil war. The intention was to not leave a mess, rather leave behind a stable goverment. The people, apparantely, do not want a stable goverment. They want another dictator. This leaves a delima for the US. If we pull out, there will be many (who currently support the pullout) who will criticize us for not leaving a stable goverment. See the dilema here?

I know what the blasted intention was, but it was completely unneeded. The US managed to turn a small country with almost no army into an international terror almost overnight because they could find no one to blame for the terrorist attacks. FOOLISHNESS. Then you kill people and destroy a nation to find weapons that don't exists, create a government that does not work and bring peace to a region that was already at peace. American Imperialism at its finest. Close your ears and open your mouths. Tyrant of the Globe.

Dude, you need serious help, as well as a reality check. Iraq has been a threat to the US for years under Saddam. Countries carry the right to defend themselves. When the US does exactly that, however, we face condemption.

Iraq could have done nothing to harm the US after the Gulf War, perhaps throwing harsh words your way and hurting your feelings.
Iraq was a poor country will baerly an army. Now it is all that but it is also a country on the Brink of an unneeded civil war!

Iraq was a threat to the entire middle east. Let me tell you about something; its called a SCUD. Its a powerful missile that can carry weapons of mass destruction. Weapons of mass destruction is an umbrella term for the following:
1.) Nuclear
2.) Biological
3.) Chemical
4.) Atomic
Iraq was in clear possesion of SCUDs, and it can be easily implied then that they would have something to load it with. After the mass genocide by Saddam upon his own people with chemical weapons, it can easily be assumed that Iraq was in possesion of chemical weapons, thus posing a threat to the US, Japan, Isreal, and Britan.

The Commisions found nothing. No weapons to threaten the world. Nothing.
A war to kill so many had not one of the intended effects. You would justify murder to prevent an imaginary war.

The Commisions could only go where Saddam permitted them. Did you know that, in the weeks just before and during the inspection, certain anti-American countries around Iraq came into possesion of WMDs?

Despite my sincerest attempts at a logical talk, it seems that you are utterly incapable of it. I leave saying Iraq was not a threat. This is the truth. Too many have died for no reason. Perhaps more should die before you see that.

You sir (or ma'am, whichever) are illogical. You promote genocide and ignore odvious truths. Who here is incapable of logic?

For All To See (Iraqi weapons inspection report around 2003)

un.org/Depts/unmovic/documents/S-2003-580.pdf

This is a rather lengthy 43 page report on found weapons in Iraq by UN inspectors. Not to be read by those who follow blindly.

We've discussed this already. Get a life.

Friend, I have struck a nerve.

You haven't, you have only danced around my point. Lets get in to a hypothetical demonstration. Say you want to search my computer. I agree, but I only let you search certain parts. You can ONLY search thoose parts. Now, what would I do? I would move any files you might be looking for to restricted areas, or delete them. After all of them are taken care of, I let you have access to my system- but all are deleted without a trace.

This is how it was with the weapons inspectors and Saddam. He had odvious chemical weapons capabilities and had only to move them at his leisure.