[DanaC]

The will of the people in Iraq was not taken into account. What was taken into account was the will of the Whitehouse. This is not a defence of Saddam's sovereignty, it's a defence of Iraqi sovereignty. More to the point it is a denial that any single nation has the right to determine another nation's political or developmental path.

That a country is run by a dictator is not, in and of itself, a justification for invasion and occupation. It may however, be a justification for exerting international pressure. When South Africa was run under the system of apartheid, in which the larger part of its population was utterly subjugated, the west did not invade. When Afghanistan was under the rule of the Taliban and they were burning down the girls' schools and subjugating their entire female population, the West did not invade until after America had been attacked. There are vicious dictators the world over, it has never been seen as an acceptable rationale for invasion and enforced occupation by another sovereign power.