wanderingsoul ,

If you review the sources, I believe that you’ll find that the reason presented for the invasion of Iraq was the purported possession of and efforts to acquire additional weapons of mass destruction (WMD), not due to the 9/11 incidents. That these armaments did not in fact exist does not invalidate them being the – wrong – basis for the invasion.

An intelligence assessment/critique: http://www.gwu.edu/~nsarchiv/NSAEBB/NSAEBB80/

An unflattering review by John Dean: http://writ.news.findlaw.com/dean/20030606.html

The CIA’s 2002 assessment: http://www.cia.gov/cia/reports/iraq...aq_Oct_2002.htm

From the International Institute for Strategic Studies: http://www.iiss.org/news-more.php?itemID=88

Note how the failure to find the expected WMDs “has intensified the debate about justification for the war” : http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/3722306.stm

Finally, if you read Tony Blair's speech to his Party’s conference in Brighton, you’ll see that he eventually recognized that the basis for the invasion of Iraq was wrong: http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/politics/3697434.stm

And: http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/politics/3692996.stm


This contrasts with the military support provided to the Northern Alliance in Afghanistan by the US and the UK which helped overthrow the Taleban government which had provided support for al-Quaeda, the organization responsible for the 9/11 – as well as a number of other – incidents.

__________________
Eudaimonia