You wrote: "And you can be sure if the Democrats had denied the president's request and there was another attack- they would have gotten full blame for it. "
And I think the Bush administration probably thought that they would get the blame if there were another terrorist attack on American soil post 9/11, and if they did not respond to British as well as American intelligence reports that claimed Suddam Hussein had weapons of mass destruction.
So, how can you excuse the Democrats' decision to support military action lest they get blamed for an attack on American soil, but you won't entertain the same motivation for the Bush Administration? For the latter, you figure it MUST have been to avenge the pride of Daddy Bush and/or due to greedy ambitions to control Iraq's oil. I haven't heard you or others critical of Bush ever say that there might have been some defendable reason for the actions taken by Bush.