If Saddam had sent those planes into the Towers, and promised more death to come, then yes, I would definitely support attacking his regime. But as it stands there is no evidence of any kind, and a unilateral assault on Iraq would, in my mind, be disastrous. Apart from the civilian dead, what would be done to placate the various nationalisms? I mean, would the Shi'ias get their patch, the Kurds theirs? What about the Sunni minority which rules Iraq? I think containment of Saddam has worked fine. This "regime change" is totally unnecessary, especially given that Iraq controls only a portion of its own air space. What the hell is it going to do?
If the US sought mere vengeance, then Afghanistan would be a parking lot. It's not, quite the contrary, and this no doubt rankles the Soft-on-al-Qs -- oh for a million dead! Think of the organizing possibilities! Al-Qaeda has recently stated that it will kill as many people as it can, that last year's attacks were just the beginning. Saddam, awful though he is, hasn't gone this route, and being a materialist thug, it certainly isn't in his interests. That's one difference between the two situations. A big one, actually.
DP