Let's take a walk down memory lane...
Iraq invades Kuwait. The Dems think we should do nothing. The French think we should do nothing (maybe some sanctions). After almost six months of lobbying Bush the First convinces the UN to go after him. The French insist that we not actually go after Saddam, just get him out of Kuwait.
We kick his butt faster than anyone thought possible. Bush, good to his word, does not go for the kill. Saddam, in retreat, sets the Kuwaiti oil fields on fire.
As part of the end of hositilities, Iraq agrees to disarm. The UN sends inspectors in to make sure he does. Saddam jerks the inspectors around until 1998 and then kicks them out. We should have resumed hostilities then, but Clinton was president.
GWB takes office and starts to put the pressure back on Saddam to comply with his ORIGINAL agreement to disarm. Everyone seems to forget that we stopped bombing the crap out of him only because he agreed to disarm.
Since he has still not disarmed, since there is good intelligence tying him to various terrorist groups, since we were attacked on 9/11 by terrorists groups, we feel that NOW is a good time for Saddam to comply with his agreements, or we will resume hostilities.
This is why containment won't work. Containment will not disarm him. He needs to be disarmed because he has already invaded his neighbors and would likely do so again if he thinks no one would stop him.
The PRK is a separate issue, with different dynamics, that will be handled at a different time, in a different way.
By the way, what are your credentials that lead you to be an expert on foreign policy? Mine are a degree in Polical Science, I had Kurt Valdheim as a professor for International Relations, and three years in state politics and two years as an aide to a Congressman who co-chaired the foreign relations committee.
What terrorists who have attacked the United States were supported by Saddam? Not OBL - or at least no evidence provided so far. If Saddam-supported terrorists have attacked other countries, then let those countries go after Saddam. Nobody has offered evidence that they've attacked us. Once again, if containment will work against North Korea -- and Bush says it will - - I merely am a Bush supporter who'd like to see that Bush policy tried against Iraq. Just as Being for Contaiment in N Korea doesn't make Bush a traitor or disloyal, so being for containment in Iraq doesn't make me a traitor or disloyal, merely someone who wants some consistency in foreign policy.