Oh, and as to your question "Are you really suggesting that if only the Bush Administration had left this issue out of the eqation that we would then be in a completely different situation than the one we're in, visa via world opinion, the protestors and U.N. Security Council?????" . . I posted this a couple weeks ago and I stand by it:
______________________________________________
It's a very complicated situation, but here's my take on it..
1) The UN imposed sanctions since the end the Gulf War have successfully contained and weakened Saddam Hussein's abilities to maintain and develop weapons of mass destruction, and would more then likely continue doing so.
2) What the sanctions have also done is cause mass hardship on the Iraqi people who already live under the dictatorship of a psychotic torturer and mass-murderer. The sanctions have led to a sky-high infant mortality rate, poverty, malnutrition, and a severe lack of basic medical supplies in Iraq.
3) Lifting the sanctions is not an option because Saddam Hussein has shown time and again to be reckless, agressive, and willing to procure, develope, and use chemical weapons (although the one's he used against the Kurds before the Gulf War were given to him by the Reagan/Bush people when he was at war with Iran) against his own people and the countries surrounding him.
4) Saddam Hussein is not going to resign or be voted out of office anytime in the near future, and there is no reasonable indications that any sort of internal uprising that could remove him from power is being planned or feasable.
5) Saddam Hussein agreed to certain terms with the UN in order to secure a cease fire and end the Gulf War in order to avoid an invasion of Bagdad and maintain his postion of power. Since then, time and time again he has broken those agreements; he has threatened more agression; he has been caught trying to procure elements to develop nuclear weapons; and he has continued to arbatraily brutalize, torture, and murder his own people.
6) In 1991 when US-led UN Coalition forces initiated Operation Desert Storm in response to Saddam's invasion of Kuwait, Iraqi troops began almost immediate mass defections and surrender, and within 48 hours the Iraqi army had been routed and defeated.
7) 12 years of UN sanctions and inspections have severely weakened the same Iraqi military that wasn't much of force in the first place.
8) Considering the above facts, I feel like an invasion of Iraq is completely justified and is the right thing to do, and many more Iraqi lives will be saved in the long run by doing so then lost during what should be a swift invasion, and the sooner it is done the better. . . but then again every American has a right to feel the way they want and speak their mind about this and any other situation.
9) Rather then stick to the above facts, the Bush administration has made a complete and total mess of the situation by using baseless, overstated, misleading rhetoric about Iraq's current threat to US and world security, and by engaging in a baseless, unecessary, and bizzare attempt to falsly tie Saddam Hussein and his regime to Osama bin Ladin, Al Qaieda, and the 9/11 terrorist attack on our country (bin Laden has prove ties to Iran, not Iraq). The Bush administration has boxed themselves into a position where Turkey was basically able to black-mail them into demanding billions of $'s of our tax money in return for letting us use their country as a point of attack.
As I said, I think there are ligit reasons for use of military force, but if a significant number of people are against it based on false perceptions that it is too dangerous, then the Bush people have no one to blame but themselves. . .
______________________________________________
Would having stuck to the indisputable facts have prevented all protesting? No, but somehow I have a hard time seeing the George Clooney's and Martin Sheen's of the world carrying signs and yelling that Bush is a "cowboy" for wanting to stop the brutal treatment and murder of his own people by Saddam, nor could France and Germany have jumped on the exaggerations to go against the invasion and would have been forced to admit they have financial interests or go along.
I'll also add that while constitutionally protected, I think burning the flag because you disagree with a politician is disrespectful, stupid, and an extremely counterproductive way to express an opinion .
I wish they didn't. 
