I didn't agree with any of these, so I'll just leave my opinion and go: I think the War in Iraq was both justifiable and unnecessary. In essence, there were plenty of good reasons to justify a war in Iraq, but we did not use any good justifications. To my understanding, the original justification was the potential of WMDs and defying the wishes of the UN. A lot of intel came out shortly thereafter that the threat of WMDs were unfounded, and although it made sense to believe that Iraq could use them again, the belief and not the proof of which is not sufficient enough reasoning anyways. Secondly, I'm not going to pretend I know a lot about military strategy, but I think conventional warfare was an entirely wrong approach. Most of our targets were terrorist networks that were able to garner support by propaganda, covert operations, etc, and realistically, you can't fight an enemy when you don't have much clue of who the enemy is supposed to be. Lastly, on a more controversial note, I think the exit strategy we used was also completely irrational. The Iraqi government was clearly not ready for the responsibility of securing their country, and what little good we were able to make out of this mess was dashed away when insurgency came flooding back on our coattails. We should have stayed until the state of Iraq was much more stabilized before leaving, and then slowly pooled soldiers away as it became clear that they could handle things for themselves.