Hello,

A preemptive strike in Iraq was not entirely justified, nor is it now, and that is the root of protestors arguements.  The rationale to go to war was that Saddam had WMD's, which clearly he did not, and that he was involved with 9/11, which clearly he was not.  While a preemptive strike is the best defense, it must be ethical and globally justifable; as an example, if we felt Canada was a threat, we could invade them, but that doesn't mean anyone else would agree with it, nor does it mean that it would be the right thing to do.  It's the same thing here.. we claimed there was a real threat in Iraq, but upon invading, we discovered that those claims were unfounded.  While it is of course wonderful to bring freedom to those in Iraq who wanted it, was it worth the compromised integrity of our intelligence community, forieng policy, and administration?  Was it worth the billions of dollars, and thousands of American lives?  Moreover, was it ethical, was it globally justifiable?