Because we don't have a clue, NOT A CLUE, as to how to retaliate effectively against terrorists. That's why we chose to fight a CONVENTIONAL war against a toothless old tiger.
Your other points are just as flaccid so I won't waste my time addressing them.
Hmmm...I wonder why you left the end of my line off when you quoted it? You know, the part where I asked, "Because it worked so well in Afghanistan?" I think you left it off because you don't have a clue how to respond effectively to it. What exactly are we supposed to do, sit around waiting for the next September 11th with our fingers up our noses? Three thousand Americans get killed by 19 guys with boxcutters in an hour and a half and you figure our response should be what? Anything but busting up training camps and killing terrorists? And if it's such a bad move, why are all of Khaddaffi's WMD programs deader than Disco? When a terrorist regime voluntarily gives up the means for nuclear blackmail, was it because our total inability to respond to terrorism scared him so much?
Oh, and I'm sure that Saddam's neighbors would be glad to hear your insights on his toothlessness. I'm sure every American pilot who got shot at those 2,500 times by Mr. Toothless will be glad to hear that hostile acts against American airmen no longer count as an act of war. I'm sure Al Qaida would love to hear about it, since they were working with him. Will you also be telling Mullah Omar that his Afghanistan was a mighty military power? Will you be telling all those people raped and tortured by Saddam's regime that they shouldn't have worried, because he was toothless?
Your other points are just as flaccid so I won't waste my time addressing them.
Suuuuuuurrrrreee they are...just like my mention of Afghanistan. Very convenient.