Baitrunner,

I do not for a moment question your knowledge of military history.

However, with all due respect, I think you missed the point of the WWII vs. Iraq comparison.

JFM wrote:

"Yes, Japan attacked us, but not Hitler. Please tell me why our preemptive attack on the European continent was necessary? Hitler never attacked the US. (He technically declared war but never fired a shot)

I'm curious as to how you will argue that the European campaign was not preemptive?"

Therefore, your fascinating (as always) history lesson on Iraq and WWII does not address this question, in my estimation, unless I missed something. Wait, I'll read your post again....Nope, I am quite certain that your response to Flag Up, while unquestionably accurate as to the historic facts, is completely irrelevant to the subject at hand:

Comparing our eventual involvement in Europe during WWII to our preemptive first strike in Iraq.

Tactics and rules of engagement and Iraqi history aside, clearly there is no comparison between our entry into the European theater in WWII and our preemptive first strike in Iraq.

One can hardly call our eventual involvement in WWII, after being attacked by the Japanese and a subsequent declaration of war against the U.S. by Hitler's Germany, who had been slowly conquering the entire European continent for two years prior, a "PREEMPTIVE FIRST STRIKE", which was JFM's original point.

I'm sure you were very tired when you wrote that, what from posting all of your right wing propaganda and trying to watch Stargate at the same time.

Ya know, Bait, maybe you shouldn't mix the two. I think you may be confusing the two, and alot of SCIENCE FICTION is finding it's way into your political thinking! :p