Which is what I have been telling the libs at work for weeks. There are many easier ways for us to get the oil without war. They cannot fathom this so I often point them to the link on clinton in this month's Atlantic journal discussing Iraq and these links (reason - they believe Clinton/Gore blindly so if you can show them they agree they get all tied in knots).
Gore repeats that Saddam MUST GO - June 2000
Taliban, Clinton, Saudi Involvement - All laid out in a book published in 2000 (from USMC.MIL site)
The Democrats' Case Against Saddam Hussein (Dems nailed, yet again)
Headline Rundown and links on Iraq - Things the democrats have conviently forgot...
Saddam Abused His Last Chance, Clinton -clear and present danger to safety of people everywhere 1998
What the democrats want you to forget
Iraq is a Regional Threat, capable of as much as 200 tons of VX nerve agent (1999 Clinton report)
Czech military reports say iraq has smallpox virus in weapons stockpile (and camelpox)
Iraqi chemical weapons buildup reported (Sept 2001 Report)
Clinton, Gore rally domestic support for strike at Iraq, "unholy axis" (1998 Must read)
statement President Clinton from 1998 on the air strikes
Iraq Liberation Act of 1998 - Full Text, Sense of Congress - Remove Saddam
In 1999, Saddam insisted on being paid in Euros instead of dollars for his oil; this was a huge windfall for him, and a loss to the American economy:
http://www.mediamonitors.net/williamclark1.html
http://www.itszone.co.uk/zone0/viewtopic.php?t=3630
As I said, protection of the American economy is a legitimate reason to go to war.
As far as the war on terrorism, I think President Bush would convince a lot more people of his sincerity if he were to do something about the millions of illegals crossing our borders. Granting them amnesty is not the answer.