They were pawns. One imperial overlord forced them into an army. Another one slaughtered them because of it. The whole game is disgusting. And don't forget that the US bankrolled Saddam before he moved into Kuwait.
The million Iraqis killed by the US embargo are also pawns. There isn't even any good reason for this one.
I respectfully submit that you're retreating into generalities now, and you've obviously already equated the U.S. to Iraq in terms of being an "imperial overlord," yet another propaganda phrase that does not stand up to any sort of objective scrutiny. If you really think we were equivalent in that war, ask the Kuwaitis.
I insist that there is no shadow of moral equivalency between the Iraqi government allowing its citizens to die of a world, not a U.S. embargo (if it were only us it wouldn't kill anyone, would it?) and the deliberate targeting of innocent civilians in a terrorist attack. None. The argument has failed, give it up.
It isn't any sort of "game," it is war. There aren't any rules; if there were, 5000 people would still be alive on the East coast. It disgusts me as well. If you can think of a way to stop this without killing anyone, I'm all ears, but please don't suggest that the solution is to undo fifty years of foreign policy - that cannot be done.