> 1) Saddam was a threat to U.S. interests before 9/11....He had developed WMD and used chemical weapons fatally against Iran and Iraqi Kurds. Iraq's official press issued statements praising the 9/11 attacks on the U.S.
> 2) The threat of renewed aggression by Saddam was more troubling and urgent after 9/11.
> 3) To contain the threat from Saddam, all reasonable means short of war had been tried unsuccessfully for a dozen years.
> 4) While there were large risks involved in a war, the risks of leaving Saddam in power were even larger. The U.S. and British pilots patrolling the no-fly zones were routinely under enemy fire, and a larger confrontation – over Kuwait again or some other issue – appeared virtually certain to arise
And probably the biggest factor:
> 5) America after 9/11 had a lower tolerance for such dangers.
But let's just ignore history and claim that there was no other impetus for war other than making accusations that turned out to be false.