War or Peace?

I have been a staunch supporter of our efforts in Iraq since the beginning, although in March of 2003 when we initially invaded Iraq I was only a 17 year old  in high school with little practical geopolitical knowledge. In spite of this I knew Saddam was a evil dictator that was a threat to peace and stability and therefore needed to be removed. I think often the Iraq debate, 5 years later, is still centered on whether or not it was prudent to do what we did in the spring of 03'. Opponents of the war say, "All of the problems in Iraq are a result of us invading in the first place", that maybe correct but since any projection of what Iraq would look like if we hadn't invaded would be mere speculation we can't know if some other more horrible unforeseen situation might have risen if we hadn't invaded. The reality is we don't know what the Middle East or the rest of the world would look like if we hadn't invaded, maybe better or maybe worse. The point I'm trying to make is that debates on whether or not we should have invaded Iraq is one for historians many years from now. The debate needs to be what is best not only of American interests in the region but what is best for the Iraqi people. Now in the two large contemporary American wars, Vietnam and Iraq, there have been two sides, those for peace and those for war. Is is really that simple? The phrases "make love not war" or "no war" sound really good at first glance to me. I think love is better then war and I don't want any wars, but again is is really that simple? War means death, destruction, hunger, insanity, famine and terror so according to most anti-war activists I support all the things listed above, but I don't want any of those things. I now see why many naive people of my generation (gen. y) latch on to anti-war movements since they simple sound better. I asked the question earlier if the peace vs. war distinction was really that easy, I now I want to answer it. Let's take the war we are in now as a perfect example. I support keeping our troops in Iraq as long as it takes to produce a stable and free Iraq so I'm branded pro-war, but I hate war!!! It is simply because I hate war that don't want our troops to leave early, most anti-war activists would say I just contradicted myself, but therein lies the inherent problem. Most anti-war activists want all of our troops out tomorrow which I and a lot of people believe will lead to Al-Qaeda in Iraq retaking the ground they lost as a result of the surge, Iran moving more into Iraq via the Mahdi Militia, and this all would lead to a civil war between the Sunni insurgency, the Shia insurgency and the fragile Iraqi government that would make the violence after the bombing of the 2006 Al-Askari Mosque in Samarra look like child's play. Thousands upon thousands of Iraqi's would die as a result and the war could spill into Iran, Saudi Arabia, Turkey and Jordan resulting in a catastrophe like we have never seen. So really isn't it that people who call for our immediate withdraw from Iraq, unknowingly or not, are calling for more war and more death. I don't mean to attack people who want to withdraw now from Iraq, but to really want us to pack our bags and get out of there now you have to be either naive to the fact the it would be a disaster or you would have to simply not care. Politics and war are not simple things so when people reduce a complicated situation such as the Iraq War to a simple slogan, "war or peace?", people should really examine whether it's really that simple.