Is war agains Iraq the answer?

" 1) Where exactly are our oil profits from almost invading Haiti to try to remove a dictator? (Remember that? We almost did go in and were 1 hour away from war when the dictator stepped down after being convinced by Powell)"

US pressure in that case served the interests mainly of Corporate America (TM), not those of the haitian people. More information at
http://www.sonic.net/~doretk/Issues/96-06 JUNE/haitiaftertheu.s..html

" 2) Where exactly are our oil profits from Somalia? I don't recall any."

Somalia was (and still is) in a complex situation after several years of Civil War. This page http://www.boogieonline.com/revolution/multi/war/somalia.html
provides valuable information.

" 3) Neither do I recall any oil profits, or any profits, from walking into Bosnia.

5) No oil or business profits which I remember so vividly from our venture into Kosovo - something which the European nations begged us to do, and begged us not to go to the Security Council because the Russians would veto the proposal."

Clinton's personal interests in the Balkans situation were at stake there. "In the case of Bosnia, intervention was motivated in large part by the desire of President Clinton to remove Bosnia from the national agenda before the 1996 election." (Burg, 1999 - http://web.mit.edu/ssp/fall99/burg.pdf )

" 4) I do not recall any oil profits from removing Noriega in Panama."

It was about the Cold War. Noriega used to be in CIA's payroll and when he "became a double-agent" (simplistically speaking), the US overthrew him.

" 6) No oil profits from Korea. In fact, it has been an extremely expensive drain to keep up the DMZ...and for no real reason other than trying to stem a dictatorship. I don't see a very profitable venture there, do you? Please list some facts."

That's why, although being listed as one of the members of the "Axis of Evil" (hah!), Korea is not under imminent threat of war. Iraq is. Days ago the US claimed that the Iraqi missiles were irregular because they were beyond the acceptable specifications for about ~50km. Korea recently said they have missiles that can fly all the way to the US.

" 7) How exactly did we profit from sending troops into Vietnam? Regardless of whether you were for or against the war, how was it anything else but the clash of ideals, even flawed as they were?"

Strategic presence at the region, just like Afghanistan.

" 8) People say that Kuwait was about oil as well. Perhaps it was, but then again I humbly submit that you are not a Kuwait who experienced the brutal regime of Saddam Hussein and cheered in the streets when the U.S. troops arrived. Do you honestly think that they cared if it was for oil or for other ideals? I suggest that you speak to some before you make suggestions such as these."

Now they do. They are still paying their debts for the US help. The Gulf War was a lose-lose situation for Kuwait. I blame Saddam for that.

" 9) Did we have a cold war with the Soviets for oil? After all, that silent war cost us trillions of dollars...and for what? We have made bargains with other dictators, why did we not simply bargain with them?"

It was for way me than oil. It was for the position the US is now: the only superpower.

My conclusion is that you're making a logical fallacy here. You're implying that the Iraq situation is not about oil because the aforementioned ones weren't.

" Before you start assigning nonexistant purposes, or even shadowy ones, to the motives of a President, I suggest that you sit down and read a comprehensive history of each conflict instead of the liberal pap and drivel which spews from the mouths of raving anti-U.S. protesters. It is far too facile to wave your hands and simply attribute anything you dislike about the U.S. to Imperial and Oil interests."

Who writes the history? We have seen it happen, we remember, as we see now. We see *now* that it is about oil. When they'll write about 2003 in the History books, they're not gonna write that it was about oil. Then, in ten years, someone will read the history books like you're recommending and then say that the oil interest was "nonexistant or shadowy", since it's not on the books.

" The U.S. is being assailed by everyone in the world whom are under the impression that the U.S. has done wrong in the past. While this is true and we have certainly made numerous mistakes in our foreign policy,"

Any of them in your previous list?

" it is also true that those same people are under the impression that the U.S. can do no right."

This is not true. Not everyone who thinks that the US has done wrong in the past (a true fact, as you said) thinks that the US can do no right.

" This is a blatant canard which must be dispelled by the facts. I see no oppression enforced by the U.S. and yet I am witness to constant accusations of others who happen to insist that we are no better than Saddam Hussein."

I agree with you here. I don't see the US and Iraq as equals, but I do see Bush much more inclided to war than Hussein, right now. Note that this was not true back in Gulf War I, when Hussein attacked first. The point here is that Bush wants to pass an impression that Iraq attacked first through terrorism. Equating Iraq to the Al-Qaeda is just as wrong as equating US to Iraq.

" This is nowhere near a fair assessment of the country or even policies as a whole and represent the attitudes of people with a serious axe of hatred to grind."

I do see hatred in both sides (not in you, but in people that say that "war is the only solution"), and I am deeply saddened by what I see. That's why I am pro-peace.