I have read the entire thread, up to this point. Your posts are well written. You put up a good arguement for not entering into conflict with Iraq.
You just agreed that going with my shoot the snake before it bites you, that Irag was indeed a snake, but you assert it is the wrong snake to shoot.
Indeed, there are many poisonous snakes in that area of the world. It's a veritable snake den.
In my opinion, our greatest enemy is Islam....from without and within. As you have pointed out, Iraq does not treat diligent Islamists kindly, then there must be some other reason, that many in our government are giving special attention to Iraq.
The key, must be to the character and nature of Saddam himself. He is aging. He has not attained what he has always wanted. He has demonstrated a complete lack of restraint in his efforts to get what he wants.
Now, if the most dangerous snake was Saudi. What effect would shooting the Iraqi snake have?
In this area of the world, it all comes down to two things.
Oil
Religion. This religion openly states it wants world dominion.
A defeat of Iraq, that left the oil fields still usable, would hurt the house of Saud more than anyone. This hurt would come in two ways.
Millions of barrels of oil on the market would have an immediate economical effect on an already economically floundering Saudi.
It would be demonstrated to the Islamic world that Saudi's much vaunted oil choke hold on the US, was not enough to prevent a US military victory against an "Islamic" nation. OK, we know it's not, but THEY put it under that umbrella.
So, perhaps the Iraqi snake is the right one to shoot first, while we contemplate our defense against the other snakes in the snake den.