No, Saddam started it by invading a sovereign nation (Kuwait) in 1990. He aggravated the situation by continuing to doggedly pursue WMD, flaunting UN resolutions and forging alliances with Al Queda and other terrorists.
This will be an immoral war because we are going to wipe out thousands of people based on the miniscule possibility that Hussein is just going to, on a whim, launch an attack on us or our allies.
The danger is not so much a direct attack from Saddam's own Iraq, but a proxy attack facilitated by Iraqi chem/bio weapons, Iraqi-supplied intelligence and training. The possibility, far from being 'miniscule', is more like an inevitability, given Saddam's mentality and record of war-atrocities.
Furthermore, the inevitability of civilian casualties cannot be cited as a reason not to go to war. By your mis-reasoning, Saddam is allowed the widest latitude to develop WMD and do mischief, while the US is held to the strictest standards of tolerance and passivity.
And there will be no 'butchering' of innocents. The US military goes to unprecedented lengths to minimize civilian casualites; and those casualties deserve to be balanced against the countless innocent lives that will be saved by riding Iraq (and the world) of this mass-murdering dictator.
The remainder of your post is mostly mawkish sentimentality about the futility of war -- any war -- and paranoid meanderings about the supposed dangers of our own leadership. These musings only illustrate your own mental confusion and flight from the facts and hardly deserve a response. Suffice it to say that you have not made your case!