The difference is that if Obama were sitting in the WH on 9/11<quoted text>
The difference is that if Obama were sitting in the WH on 9/11 and Saddam had been giving the UN the runaround to come clean about his WMDs post 9/11, the Democrats would remember how they ALL had considered him a threat just a few years before and more than just 111 would have supported toppling his regime then too.
And once the mass graves were uncovered, John Kerry would be in front of the cameras telling the American people it was the right thing to do because of Saddam's "crimes against humanity".
There was something to gain politically for Democrats to turn tail and let Bush hang out to dry, including John Kerry, when it was a matter of fighting the enemy on their own turf after they made Iraq the frontlines - and the "crimes against humanity" were of no importance anymore.
The difference between Iraq and Syria is it's now Obama's and Kerry's reputations on the line to intervene for humanitarian reasons. There hasn't even been another 9/11 and Syria didn't attack us either.
It's called hypocrisy of the highest order by the same weasels who care about human rights only when there's something to be gained politically.
More Malarky ...alternative history from the Twilight Zone