Invading Iraq because it had a bunch of nerve gas artillery rockets in a bunker somewhere would have been foolish. Lots of countries have those, and we don't invade them. Invading Iraq because it had a connection with Bin Laden would have been foolish. There was no such connection. Invading Iraq because it represented an immediate threat to American interests would have been foolish. There was no such threat.
And while we're on the subject, invading Iraq to liberate the Iraqi people would have been foolish. Trying to give freedom to people who aren't prepared to take it for themselves, is more trouble than it's worth.
All of those things were *propaganda*, and particularly blatant and obvious propaganda. If I thought for one minute Bush actually believed a word of it, I'd have to revise my opinion of him substantially downward, just as I have had to do with so many otherwise intelligent people here who so completely fell for it.
The United States, under the leadership of Bush II, invaded Iraq because Saudi Arabia represented an immediate threat to American interests, and to a lesser extent Syria and Iran, because all three of those nations have such compelling reasons for their threatening behavior that nothing short of an invasion or convincing threat of an invasion would stop them, and because the conquest of Iraq is a prerequisite for any invasion or credible threat of invasion of Syria, Iran, or Saudi Arabia.
And, having conquered Iraq, we can see the governments of Syria, Iran, and Saudi Arabia acting in a manner consistent with having recieved a quiet but convincing threat of invasion if they don't shape up. A bit of applied geopolitics that may not be as satisfying as dropping the 82nd Airborne into the Hejaz, but it gets the job done (or at least underway) with a lot less bloodshed.
What he said.