If we'd thought it out, we probably wouldn't have done it this way.

And that's why pro-warriors can't allow themselves to think about it.

It starts with ignoring the inspections, because it is obvious that the inspections process would likely have resulted in a finding of fact (are there WMD in Iraq?) in an astronomically less costly way.

So then there is the waltz over to the human-rights issue, because how can anyone defend Saddam's regime? (As if anyone did.)

But the pro-warrior then senses that his improvised human-rights argument is extremely weak, given the invasion's huge toll in lives, the uncertainty about whether the region will even be less violent as a result, and the near-complete lack of discussion beforehand about whether this was truly the best strategy to export democracy to those who don't have it.

Obviously, that discussion didn't happen because nobody in the Bush Administration could have made the case with a straight face that attacking Iraq would best bring democracy to those on the globe suffering under repressive regimes. The war was never planned with an eye toward reducing human suffering. Pro-warriors can make this argument only as long as nobody scrutinizes it.

Imagine if, before the Iraq war was even a thought, you were to say to the head of any reputable organization dealing with the issue of human rights, "I have $200 billion to spend and a huge army to deploy to help end human-rights violations on this planet. Is the best way to use these resources an invasion and occupation of Iraq?" You'd have gone deaf from the laughter.

So then there is the quick Texas two-step over to the terrorism issue: Saddam was behind 9-11, so the invasion was a just, self-defense-ish attack designed to retaliate and to keep future 9-11s from happening.

Except that, in all likelihood, Saddam wasn't linked to 9-11 in any significant way. In fact, upon scrutiny, the attempt by the Bush Administration to imply this connection and successfully cause the American public to believe that Saddam was connected to 9-11 is one of the most troubling aspects of the war. This craven, cynical strategy nearly proves that the administration knew it did not have a solid case for war and therefore had to employ deception on the American people.