Vietnam and Iraq: What's the difference?

I’m enjoying writing about these controversial issues, so here’s another one: the war in Iraq.
Like most Americans, I was easily persuaded by government propaganda and the media motioning for a “War on Terror”. This was shortly after the September 11, 2001 attacks on the World Trade Center, and Americans were emotionally distraught and needed a focus to blame for the attack. Yes, the Taliban was responsible for training the men who high jacked the planes and yes, they were operating in Afghanistan. As a matter of fact, the Taliban was an oppressive political group in Afghanistan that should not have been tolerated. Therefore, I believe it is safe to say that the occupation of Afghanistan was legitimate and reasonable. But that leads to the real issue at hand: what about the occupation of Iraq?
American involvement in Iraq is not a new concept. We quickly jumped to aid the people of Kuwait and defended them from Iraq and their invasion. This was called Operation Desert Storm. The problem with this mission is that it was an opportunity to wipe Iraq of their dicatator, Sadaam Hussein, but it did not happen. The American government was clearly motivated to be involved solely for its self interest in the rich oil reserves of Kuwait. If the Iraqi’s gained control, things would have potentially been economically unfavorable for the West. However, American forces were able to push the Iraqi military out of Kuwait. Yet, we never took Sadaam out. Why not? The opportunity was there, but it did not happen. Clearly, the American government had an opportunity, but it was too engaging and probably not worth the effort in the end.
So what bothers me is the fact that, after September 11th, the United States invaded Afghanistan and then moved on to Iraq without completing military operations in Afghanistan! We spread our military force too thin and were not able to adapt to the fighting style attributed to the respective regions. I know that it is easy to criticize the government’s actions with hindsight, but some things are just obvious. First, the U.N. searched the Iraqi regime for weapons of mass destructions and did not find any evidence of such weapons. Second, military operations in Afghanistan were not complete before moving on to Iraq. Third, where are the weapons of mass destruction? The Bush Administration obviously felt confident enough to tell the public of their existence and to provide reasoning for our actions, but they were never uncovered!
I understand that Sadaam was not a good man, with several crimes to his name. But surely it is evident now that he provided some sense of stability in Iraq. Also, aren’t there more threatening leaders out there in the world? Kim Jong II possibly? I mean, they do have nuclear technology and a clearly demonstrated hatred for the United States. I guess I just feel that the war in Iraq was a big scam for making money through private contracts with the military and possibly to redeem the previous Bush Administration by getting killing Sadaam Hussein the second time around. Will the United States ever come out of this conflict with a victory? I highly doubt it, and the comparison to a modern Vietnam conflict seems very applicable to me.