Respectfully, you seem to have forgotten the time period before 2002. U.N. inspectors had already actually SEEN large stockpiles in 1994. Further, he made almost every argument that Bush did more recently. Clinton simply was trying to make foreign policy not an issue, except selectively when he needed it. During 1996, Clinton put pressure on the inspectors to NOT find anything, so as to not make an issue of violations. More than anything, the sanctions allowed him to maintain more absolute power, and to distribute every little thing where he wanted with no competition.
Were we in danger of Iraq invading the continental U.S.? No, and it was never argued either. Iraq WAS capable of putting chemical warheads or spraying RPVs on top of our troops, our allies, our allies cities, as well as launching them off of ships into our cities. It would not have been a serious military attack, but one to be recognized nonetheless.
The capability to attack us directly though was still not the basic argument. The basic argument was that Hussein'd agreed to demonstrate destruction of these capabilities, and without troops on the border, he completely refused, and didn't do much better when he did have troops waiting to attack. He'd had 12 years. Enough is enough. There was no excuse for the fecklessness of the U.N., or for the fecklessness of the United States government in refusing to follow through.