That is my take on this situation.
We went to war to remove Saddam and to remove the threat of a Nuclear Chemical or Biological Armed Iraq.
The fact there were no WMD found in Iraq has had a major world wide impact on the continuation of the War on Terror.
Our Intelligence agencies have been made to look like idiots at best liars at worst.
It has been a thorn in the side of many governments who want to support the war on terror more fully.
If this is true it is up to the President to go live with this information, citing dates,timings movements and locations.
Sadly, this is a widespread belief, that the "whole point" of the invasion was to "confiscate" some objects (WMDs). I wish people would give it just a moment's thought before they say things like this, because they'd realize how silly that sounds.
You don't invade another country in order to "confiscate" some items, and that was not the "whole point" of the invasion at all.
The whole point of the invasion was to dethrone the government of Saddam Hussein. It was to smash up the power of Hussein and his Baathists so that they no longer ruled that territory. That was the whole point of the invasion, and we succeeded.
Now, were "WMDs" in the mix? Of course: "WMDs" were a reason we wanted to dethrone Saddam Hussein. He had demonstrated a willingness to use them and ambitions to create more. Therefore, that helped convince us of the necessity to dethrone him. (Which was the purpose of the war.)
What about all those "WMDs" arguments we made before the UN? Didn't that make it seem like our goal was to "confiscate" WMDs? Well, no. The reason we were making those arguments was that among other things his ongoing WMD ambition put him in technical violation of some UN resolutions; so "WMDs" were also a reason we argued before the UNSC that they should join us in our war (this argument failed, alas). They were, in a sense, "charges" we tried to bring him up on in front of the UNSC.
But "confiscating" them was NOT "the reason" we invaded. We invaded to depose Saddam Hussein, not to "confiscate" some things.
I doubt there has been any war fought anywhere in recent centuries which one nation launched against another nation solely for the purpose of "confiscating" some objects. It even sounds silly to me.
p.s. Another way to see that my way of looking at things is correct - with my way of looking at things, everyone's actions make sense. With your way of looking at things, everyone's actions make no sense, and you start drawing silly conclusions like we need to "lay waste to" Syria and Lebanon. That's a silly conclusion because it proceeds from a flawed premise (that the "whole point" was to "confiscate" some WMDs). The whole point was to unseat Saddam Hussein's government.