Your snarky comments only serve to illustrate something many of us have long suspected.

While the "anti war" crowd will often argue "we shouldn't have gone to war because there was no link between Saddam and terrorism," many of us on the other saide have argued that, even if Saddam's ties to terrorism were shown, you (and like minded partisans) would still argue we shouldn't attack him.

Basically, no matter what proof comes out against Saddam, you retroactively decide it wasn't enough.