You might argue that "only" 40,000 civilians were killed in the UK during the "Blitz" by the Nazis which lasted longer than the Iraqi war and targeted several cities with denser populations than those in Iraq. You might also mention that the weapons used in Iraq were infinitely more precise than the haphazard ones used by the Germans in WW2 and also that the weapons used in Iraq were targeted to avoid civilian targets, as opposed to the Nazi tactic of deliberately bombing residential areas to demoralise the population.
100,000 killed in Iraq -vs- 40,000 in the Blitz?
Likely?
That's it, right there. I think only someone who is truly deluded would try to argue that what has happened in Iraq is anything near the Blitz in its impacts on infrastructure, buildings and people. The mere fact that LIVE REAL TIME footage of bombs hitting in Baghdad was even possible attests to the precision inherent in them.
Personally, I think they should be grateful we are doing it the way we are doing this. As a nation we had the power to start and end the war in just a few minutes without sending any troops in and with ZERO casualties on our side.
Instead we too the humane approach, and went in after specific individuals with hopes to make it a better place.
If I may, I'd like to borrow your London blitz angle in my letter to respond to the "Bush = Hitler" affront.