Here's another reason why the Gulf War II/World War II analogy doesn't fly. After December 7th, 1941, we didn't have to spend any time figuring out who the enemy was; we didn't have to identify where the Zeroes that swarmed around Pearl Harbor had come from; there was no question who harbored our attackers, who supported them materially, who issued their lethal commands. What's more, there was no need for a third-grade-level color-coded alert sytem; the enemy wasted no time in carrying out more attacks. The Japanese snatched up every island in the Pacific; Hitler had already subsumed France and half of Europe and was well on his way to eating the other half.
But most importantly, Saddam Hussein, in addition to threatening nothing and no one save in the fevered speculations of White House P.R. flaks, is bending over backwards to accomodate U.N. inspectors. A brutal dictator he unquestionably is, but he's not behaving like the sort of brutal dictator who's planning any kind of huge military campaign in the near future. Can anyone really question what Hitler's reaction would have been if we'd told him he must allow inspectors into his private homes, that he must tolerate spy planes flying over his fatherland, that he must permit restrictions on his economic, military and domestic policies by Americans and Europeans? His answer would have been one of refusal, then rhetoric, then immediate blood and fire. He didn't need us to make up worst-case scenarios of what he might do; he just went right ahead and did them.
The hawks are trying their best to turn Saddam Hussein into another Hitler. But it's just not working. He's a pocket Hitler, a Pinochet in big-boy clothes: an evil man, without qualification, but one that cannot instill in us the fear that a genuine threat exudes. War is justified by self-evident actions; it doesn't need a marketing department.