So now the BBC is reporting that the Israelis 'misread' Iraqi threat.

Other than the (very popular) fallback argument that Saddam Hussein was, ahem, not the nicest of all the former US puppets in the world, which pro-war argument has any shred of credibility left?

-- weapons? Still waiting.
-- bring stability to the region? Still waiting.
-- freedom and goodness for Iraqis? Still waiting (I will accept that some people in Iraq must be better off now than they were before)
-- war on terror? Ask the Russians, Turks, Brits, Saudis, Afghans, and Iraqis how that's going.

I suppose the "objective good" argument could still be used . . . the whole "even if it sucks by every measurable standard, it is still the right thing to do" philosophy that has made international relations so pleasurable for so long.