It's easy to call it a lie, now. At the time, when everyone was reading the same intel, the call to war was virtually unanimous and had been for years - distasteful as that may be.<quoted text>
Blah, blah, blah, blah, blah. Everyone knows that Bush lied about Hussein's possession of chemical and biological weapons to fool congress into voting for his resolution.
Hillary Clinton in her floor speech supporting the resolution:
"Some people favor attacking Saddam Hussein now, with any allies we can muster, in the belief that one more round of weapons inspections would not produce the required disarmament, and that deposing Saddam would be a positive good for the Iraqi people and would create the possibility of a secular democratic state in the Middle East, one which could perhaps move the entire region toward democratic reform.
This view has appeal to some, because it would assure disarmament; because it would right old wrongs after our abandonment of the Shiites and Kurds in 1991, and our support for Saddam Hussein in the 1980's when he was using chemical weapons and terrorizing his people; and because it would give the Iraqi people a chance to build a future in freedom.
However, THIS COURSE IS FRAUGHT WITH DANGER. We and our NATO allies did not depose Mr. Milosevic, who was responsible for more than a quarter of a million people being killed in the 1990s. Instead, by stopping his aggression in Bosnia and Kosovo, and keeping on the tough sanctions, we created the conditions in which his own people threw him out and led to his being in the dock being tried for war crimes as we speak.
IF WE WERE TO ATTACK IRAQ NOW, ALONE OR WITH FEW ALLIES, IT WOULD SET A PRECEDENT THAT COULD COME BACK TO HAUNT US. "
Bush lied and soldiers died.
We'll see if Obama has balls. The optimistically re-energized Islamists are betting he doesn't.