Not true. I just want to make sure the judgement is valid. If Saddam is a threat to us, than he must go. However, I have yet to see any significant link between him and 9/11. Prior to us beating the war drum to remove him, I do not know of any threat he posed to the United States. I do know, however, that he was very supportive of the Palestinians, and has rightly earned the ire of the Israelis. So I am a little concerned that we may be going to war for the sake of Israeli foreign policy instead of our own. You and I have spent enought time on the Balkans threads to know that government accusations in the run up to war often end up being quite far from accurate.
The following are, I believe, commonly held to be factual statements about Iraq, and if you take exception to any, that needs to be ironed out prior to proceeding further - a common understanding is impossible without a shared basis for that understanding.
1) Iraq is central to a region of global importance by virtue of the Middle East's oil and it's fueling of the global economy.
2) Saddam Hussein does not act in a rational manner. Rationality assumes an informed decision making process - and this process is not present in Saddam's regime.
3) Saddam Hussein is developing weapons of mass destruction, to include chemical, biological, and nuclear weapons.
Those three, when added together, are enough to warrant his removal without bringing Israel into the equation. And I would suggest you look at Israel not as a reason for Saddam's (nor of other Arab government's) pique, but as a convenient object on which to transfer his populace's discontents.
Nonetheless, since you bring it up, I'll address the issue of who, besides America, benefits from American Foreign policy in the Middle East.
First and foremost, it is obviously Israel.
With that said, I would point out that Israel comes closest in its neighborhood to sharing our ideals and values, and since American foreign policy is based upon spreading our ideals and values, our support of Israel has a definite purpose rooted in American self interest. Hence, the use of the word "besides".
Conversely, Saddam is antithetical to American ideals and interests - true, we didn't always view him so in the wake of Khomeini, but that is where it stands today, is exclusive of any consideration towards Israel, and is the biggest concern we have in the wake of 9/11 and the campaign in Afghanistan.
And just to make one thing clear between us, Bob - I supported our actions in Kosovo in 1999, continue to do so through this day, and rely on more than our government's versions of events to formulate my opinions.