Regarding Iraq (since it comes up in some other comments) one could (I am playing devil&#x27;s advocate here) make the argument that the Iraq war was a just war on false assumptions. What reasons do you need to remove a dictator?<p>0) He does not respect territorial integrity of neighbour states<p>1) He houses international wanted terrorists, makes it possible for them to hide<p>2) He commits crimes against humanity (unjust prison and death sentences, violent crimes against political opponents)<p>3) He is ignoring UN Resolutions<p>Saddam Hussein was guilty of all of the above, that said:<p>0) There was no direct connection between Hussein and 9&#x2F;11<p>1) There were no WMDs found<p>Three questions:<p>Should the United States (and the other opposing parties in the Gulf War) have left him in power or removed him then? Maybe they should have removed him then<p>Was the Iraq war based on false information, false reasoning and some deception? I would say yes it was<p>Was it still &quot;just&quot; to remove Hussein? That&#x27;s the 1 million dollar question, and I am not 100% certain how I should answer...<p>[And to clarify: I am no fan of George W. Bush, indeed no fan of the Bush family, I do think the Iraq war was wrong, but I am always open to other arguments. Christopher Hitchens made an interesting pro-Iraq war case, you should look some of his articles from that time up]