Oldguy, the problem is that the American administration has already given us plenty of reason to believe that it is, at leastin part, out for personal gain rather than the benefit of the nation. Bush believes, and may be right, that he will gain politically if he succeeds in ousting Hussein. It is certainly the case that he will suffer politically if he fails.

As to the supposed accuracy of American weapons, recall that in Afghanistan, in rural combat situations, American and Canadian troops were killed by state-of-the-art smart weapons. The collateral damage will be far higher in urban warfare. Also, it is not as unreasonable as you imply for Saddam to retreat to his cities for fighting. It makes just as good military strategy for an outnumbered and outgunned force as it does political propaganda.

Richie, no one disagrees that Saddam's rule is bad for his people. The only contention is that American aggression will not only cause considerable suffering to the Iraqis in the short term, but it also threatens to tip the balance of political power, either by creating a backlash against the U.S. or giving it too much authority.