The part that galls me is the failure of all players to be ready for the aftermath.

Maybe they felt the WMD thing was the needed motivation and kept blinders on (lied?) to keep that bogeyman in play. It now appears that few of the real decision makers could have been of the belief that an immediate threat existed --- even with the incomplete information that was reaching the ultimate desks.

So, if they felt the policy was so important that they would even lie to have it come about, how in heavens name could they also believe that Saddam would be swept aside and we'd be welcomed like the Allies returning to France in '44?!!!??!??!!! I mean, lying for public consumption is bad enough, but sometimes a leader does what they think is in their people's best interests -- and maybe not what they want -- but lying to yourself and then falling for it is exceedingly stupid.

If you were convinced it was the right move, then do it with overwhelming force and build that force for a worst-case scenario. It's easier to pull back from an easier task than to recoup a difficult one. Grrrrrrr.