@Setanta,
Your presumption, and that of other like-thinkers, is that there was never any possibility that the invasion of Iraq and the establishment of a democracy in the Muslim Middle-east was in the interests of the USA.
For some reason the vociferous critics of the Neo-Con bogey men believe they have proven their claims by noting that expressed opinions about military action in Iraq predated 9/11.
Somehow, this seems to prove, for them, that the invasion of Iraq was retribution for Saddam's plan to kill Poppy, an integral component of a sinister plan to enrich Oil companies and weapons manufacturers, or simply a naked and evil design to generate death and destruction and grasp power.
Can't be that the strategic thinking that led the Neo-cons to propose invading Iraq before 9/11 was underscored by 9/11.
Bushes detractors grossly exaggerate the administration connecting Iraq and 9/11, but to the extent they did they get no pass from me.
I have consistently argued that Bush did a disservice to the nation by underestimating the American people and framing the invasion almost exclusively in terms of WMDs, but this doesn't mean we should not have invaded Iraq.
Similarly Obama supporters (if they are honest) might argue that Obama is doing a disservice to the nation by playing the same sort of games as did Bush in justifying actions it believes are essential to the advancement of our interests, without arguing that his intentions are wrong.