The WMD thing was an issue seriously questioned by some of his own intelligence people, but Bush chose to order invasion of Iraq. I think evidence of his convoluted motivation was the subsequent invention of the so-called “Bush Doctrine.”,p>
There was more then one “Bush Doctrine. As for your assertion some of his own people question the existence of WMD what is your point? Intelligence is never a slam dunk positive or negative anyway. It is a gathering of bits of info which are then assembled and looked at in their entirety to see if a pattern of probability exists for what they are looking for.
In this case ALL the Intel agencies agreed with the assessment Hussein had and was manufacturing these WMD. Sure there were doubters, there are ALWAYS those who will see it differently, but here you are claiming because no WMD were found, then Bush lied or at least was negligent in following the advice of the great minority who said they weren’t there. It is easy to look with the crystal clarity of 20/20 hindsight and point the finger of blame.
Leaders, whether they be CEO’s or presidents make decisions based on ALL the evidence before them and take a course which is best suited to the attainment of the mission. In the case of the president of the USA, his first and foremost mission is the safety, long and short term of the citizens of the country he was elected to oversee.
If he erred then he did so on the side of caution and were I he I would have done the same thing. I would do it again if a similar preponderance of evidence were presented regarding another country intent on doing us harm.
Please remember that except for the likes of Bernie Sanders and his ilk, ALL the leading Democrats were on board since 1998 regarding the removal of Hussein and fully supported the Bush decision to take him out. It was only afetr the liberal base began to whine that the libs in Congress began to wimp, out.