Re-building is a means for boosting the re-building country's economy while simultaneously solidifying the dependency of the re-built country on the re-builder's resources.

But that's the whole point. Saddam, although an evil main, is the current legitimate ruler of Iraq. We may not like it, or the fact that he is a tyrannical dictator. The Iraqis may not like it, or the fact that he is a brutal dictator. But the fact remains that he has been in power for a long time. The US helped put him there, so I find the constant 'rogue nation' quips to be particularly hypocritical.

The US and UK have based their claims for the necessity of war on (a) humanitarian concerns, and (b) Global security.

Dictating the rebuilding process to favor one's own interests smacks to me of 'Unsolicited Services'. Saddam certainly didn't order any business from such companies. At the same time, this regime change will have an effect on both Russia's and France's trade balances. Assuming for the moment that all such business was legitimate under the existing sanctions, how could it then be fair for all post-war business to be US and UK only? How would this help with foreign perceptions of the US and UK? It would be especially hypocritical considering both countries claim to be supporters of the concept of free trade.

If this war really is about liberation, then a representative government should be installed ASAP. And then let *them* choose. If they really are grateful for the liberation, and US/UK products are priced competitively, then surely this would be a better solution.