1) The 1991 Gulf War ended, not by treaty but by cease-fire. Since you since you evidently didn't hear the news, I'll explain. We and the other members of the Coalition agreed to cease hostilities against Iraq so long as Saddam Hussein continued to abide by several conditions. Some of those conditions included not taking any military action against Coalition members (especially those enforcing the No-Fly Zones set up to protect the Kurds and Marsh Arabs, the targets of his genocidal attacks for years, that he return Coalition POWs to their home nations, that he return Kuwaitis taken by his military during their invasion of Kuwait, and immediate and unrestricted access to all his chemical, biological, and nuclear weapons programs. He, in fact, kept to none of those conditions, ever. The conditions of a cease-fire allow any party to immediately resume hostilities if any condition is broken.

This, by the way, was pretty big news at the time. I seem to recall the whole war happening on CNN.

2) Since that war ended with a cease-fire and not a treaty, we were technically still in a state of war with Iraq, much like we are still in a state of war with North Korea.

3) WMDs were never the sole reason for toppling Saddam Hussein at any point. In fact, when the President spoke before the UN to outline the case for resuming hostilities with Iraq, the very first thing he mentioned was the genocide and actual torture Saddam Hussein had committed to that point. He then gave in detail how Hussein had violated the cease-fire agreement and challenged the UN to live up to the demands it had set itself. Those demands did in fact involve WMDs. The President then decided to get another UN Resolution to cement Hussein's violations. The unanimously-approved result – Resolution 1441 – stated as a matter of fact, that Saddam Hussein was in material breach of over a dozen UN resolutions and demanded without equivocation that he immediately account for every single part of the WMD programs that numerous nations were on public record as saying he had. He did not. We levied the "serious consequences" the resolution authorized us to take. End of issue.

4) To my knowledge, the Bush administration never said that Hussein wouldn't let the inspectors in. He alleged, with copious evidence, that the inspectors were being denied unfettered access and that they were being deliberately stonewalled and intimidated.

5) You should check again. Try reading a newspaper. We have IED's in Iraq that are without a doubt from iran. We and the Iraqis have captured numerous Iranians in iraq.

6) We have hard evidence that Iran is killing Iraqis. There is no "probably" involved. We also have evidence that Iran is assisting both Sunni and Shia. Their beef isn't with the Sunni as much as it is with a democratic government that would surround them with democratic governments.

I'm rather dismayed that you would be so dogmatic and so completely wrong in your facts at the same time.

The Bush administration said we had to get Hussein because he had WMD and could hit us or our allies within 45 minutes – not because he violated a cease-fire. Then the Bush administration said Hussein wouldn't let in the weapons inspectors. That is a bald-faced lie. Bush told the UN Weapons Inspectors to get out of the country because the US was about to bomb the place.

Then the Bush administration changed their story to say we had to spread democracy – at the end of a gun – when it was conclusively proven Saddam didn't have WMD.

The last I checked, Iran was not a participant in the war we started. The collateral damage started with US bombs and US occupation. I'm willing to believe that Iran and any other country or group is happy to fan the flames but they did not start this fire. George W. Bush and his neo-con nutbags did. The blood is on their hands and the hands of every US citizen who allowed them, and continue to allow them, to get away with it.

Sure, the Iranian government has probably sought to kill Sunni civilians. The Iranians are Shiites and would be as happy obliterating the Sunnis as obliterating the Christian US. Of course the Sunni militias have sought to kill Shiites in Iraq too. We have set off the powder keg of a religious civil war.

Neo-cons with little to no understanding of the people, customs, or society of the Middle East started a war for oil that they thought they could control. Like a chemistry experiment gone bad, the reaction has raced out of control.

To blame the Iraqis or Syria or Iran for the mess we created is cowardice. Have the spine to take the blame for the things the US has done.

Karma's going to get you in the end, Jimmie.

Nice job, legaleagle.

1) Iraq wasn't an illegal war. Saddam Hussein violated a cease-fire. End of argument.

2) I'm not a Republican.

3) Yes, I say "what did you expect"? When I say that I am not surprised that so many have been killed by an Iranian government that has expressly sought to kill civilians, that is not to say that I do not care. I do and that is why I believe, like so many of you do not, that we should do everything in our power to break the back of the Mullah's government and end their predations in iraq.

4) There are many examples of Iranians being captured in Iran, along with Iranian equipment. You may recall (but probably do not) that Iran was interfering in Iraq so badly that the provisional government was making public statements about it.

5) The cowardice of the "pull out now" crowd is sickening and, quite honestly, so intellectually-deficient that I'm not giong to spend anyh more time addressing it.

"To that I say 'What did you expect?'"

Wow, how callous. Are you a human with feelings? That number represents human people. That number represents mothers, fathers, sons, daughters, and extended family members.

Citizens are not combatants. They are collateral damage. That means we (the USA) killed them. They were innocent children playing in the street or a wedding party celebrating a union of two people. Now, they are DEAD. DEAD because we, the USA, bombed them or shot them.

And you say "what did you expect?" You are as despicable as the Bush administration. Innocent people die because of US policies.

Are you so sure that Bush's Crusade is worth the lives of so many people? What exactly are we getting from it? What is he doing to make the world a better place?

What the hell makes you think we have the moral imperative to invade or attack yet another sovereign nation? Iraq is a debacle of epic proportions. Suggesting we move on to Iran it irresponsible and criminal.

Stop and get a picture of reality.