Barak,
Regardless of the president, the desire of the nation has never been to seize Iraq's oil.
Show you a clear and present danger. I guess if you are not bothered by a thug from a criminal family who siezed power, executed even members of his own family, has killed millions of his own countrymen, possesses WMD, supports terrorists, is irrational, and hates the US--then I can't show it to you. Then again, the English weren't convinced Hitler was a threat in 1939.
Your mid east analysis isn't quite accurate. Having been deployed to Saudi twice, perhaps I have a little more perpective and a little better ability to read between the lines. The Arab world often plays both sides of the deck. The threat of Saddam is what got us over there in the first place, and only because he's still a threat to all the countries over there have we been allowed to remain in Saudi and Kuwait for so long.
Bush would gain an incredible amount politically if he pulls this Iraq thing off without going to war. If Saddam were to accept exile--along with his cronies--and iraq's WMD were found and destroyed without sending troops in harms' way. Bush would scoe a huge political victory. Escalating the fighting from it's current level is a 50/50 proposition for him politically at best.
The war he's already had is the regieme change in Afghanistan and the hunting down and killing of Al Qeada (sp?). He's gaines a s much politically form that war as he's going to gain in such a manner. remember, Bush 1 was thought unbeatable after Desert Storm, yet he lost to a man that became the worst president this country has ever had.
Bush II isn't perfect, but he is a moral man who seeks God in his decisions. Our country is better off for having him than not.
Blaine
