[American Soldier]

He is actually a great deal like Hitler, except that he is a less a true ideologue. Still plays the "blame the Jews" game, tries to run a military dictatorship but has trouble with the generals. The parallels with Hitler and numerous with this character.

Everybody will admit we were right to take him out for a few weeks after we do it (just as foreigners now regularly admit to me that going after the Taliban was justified), but the inevitable cycle of history is that the English-speakers do something heroic, then the rest of the world either forgets or dismisses all of their actions as self-serving, imperialist, etc.

[dixierat22]

You fail to see that, unlike Hitler, Saddam has almost no military power left? He can barely keep control in Iraq, nuch less threaten any of his neighbors.

He has no nukes, nor is he likely to acquire any. If he had them and is as mad as people think, he would have used them.

The ONLY upside to us conquering Iraq is the OIL. That, IMO, is obvious.

[Austin Willard Wright]

Saddam does not present the same kind of threat as Hitler did. The U.S. can't forever be nursemaid to the whole world. If we try, we will undermine true national defense through futile world policing and will go the way of the British Empire. Some of us still have the quaint view that the U.S. was supposed to something different, e.g. a decentralized, civilian controlled Republic, in the course of world history.