You mean 'convinced' by false claims of WMDs?

What other reason would anyone have to invade?

Again, the assumption that nobody except Bush said there was WMD in Iraq. You can't make this lie work. Stop trying.

Here's a U.N. document by Hans Blix dated just a couple of months before the actual invasion.

In spite of the constant attempt to rewrite history, most people, including those at the U.N., suspected Iraq of harboring hidden WMD. The controversy was what to do about it. The U.N. and others supported more years of hide-and-seek. Bush and his allies wanted to finally bring about the consequences of the many resolutions.

And, as usual, the fact that inspectors actually found the evidence of illegal missile programs in progress has been completely swept under the rug.

It is also instructive to compare Iraq's claims in this document with what was actually found. For example, later inspectors found tons of documents, while Iraq here claims it has none.

If we hadn't been able to go over Iraq freely after the invasion, the U.N., you, and everyone else would still be guessing, especially given the patterns of concealment and deception outlined in this report in great detail.

At what point would the U.N. have decided enough was enough? Who knows? Probably never. It's no skin off their nose if inspections go on for years--hey, it's a living--and it's not like they'd lose their jobs if they missed something that ended up blowing up Tel Aviv.