The open letter reads in part: "Just as we mourn for the victims of Saddam's regime, we also grieve for the Americans and Iraqis who were killed or injured during the liberation or by terrorists determined to hold us back. We will honor those who have sacrificed for our freedom by building a new Iraq that lives in peace with the nations of the world, without fear of war, torture chambers or terrorism."
Funny...don't remember any of these folks from Fahrenheit 9/11.
We did the right thing here, people. And there are those who still want to say "sure, it was a good thing, but the ends don't justify the means." But suppose we had done it their way? Suppose the UN played the "does he, doesn't he" game with Saddam a little longer? Suppose they wrote a few more resolutions, merely moving the line he's not supposed to cross after he crosses it? Suppose we waited for international support that might never have come, considering some of the major players had lucrative oil contracts with Iraq? What then?
Saddam and his sadistic offspring would still be in power, still filling mass graves, still denying the Iraqi people money from the oil for food program, and, seeing as how the Nigerian yellowcake story might not be the misinformation it was portrayed as, trying to pursue a nuclear weapons program.
I have to ask the obvious here: Do their means justify that end?