I assume you know about the Project for the New American Century (PNAC)?

A think-tank that consisted of high level so-called neo-conservatives who developed papers and reports and letters that indicated the United States should, for example, attack Iraq. The same high level neo-conservatives who became an integral part of the Bush administration. Am I to assume you think it was a coincidence that the Bush administration that decided to invade Iraq was made up of the people who advocated attacking Iraq throughout the late 90s?

PNAC's stated goals were:

- we need to increase defense spending significantly if we are to carry out our global responsibilities today and modernize our armed forces for the future;

- we need to strengthen our ties to democratic allies and to challenge regimes hostile to our interests and values;

- we need to promote the cause of political and economic freedom abroad; [and]

- we need to accept responsibility for America's unique role in preserving and extending an international order friendly to our security, our prosperity, and our principles.

In 1998 they drafted an open letter to President Clinton, signed by Donald Rumsfeld and Paul Wolfowitz, among others, urging that he authorize an attack on Iraq in order to depose Hussein. They said that they believed Hussein had weapons of mass destruction and would pose a threat to US interests in the Middle East if he were left alone.

In 2000 PNAC published a report advocating the strengthening of US military force for both the purposes of defense and the purposes of shaping international politics and performing "constabulary" duties in critical regions. Regarding Iraq, the report said that the military would be justified in occupying Iraq and that this would be a good course of action in order to create a substantial US military presence in the Middle East and to counter the growing threat of Iran.

Within 9 days of 9/11, PNAC appealed to President Bush to attack Iraq. Throughout 2002 they continued to advocate this, saying that leaving Hussein in power was a "surrender to terrorism".

Given that PNAC was a neo-conservative effort supported by individuals who became members of the Bush administration, I think it is fairly reasonable to believe that said administration used the good grace and national anger created by 9/11 to advance the goal of invading Iraq for international political/military reasons.

I am not in this post giving any opinion either way about the rightness or wrongness of that line of thinking, and once again I repeat that I don't think the US had anything to do with 9/11, but I think it's pretty clear that the Bush administration took advantage of the general sentiment among the American people following 9/11 to advance their goals related to Iraq. After all, you said yourself that there is very little actual connection between the events of 9/11 and Iraq (and I agree). But the administration were linking Iraq with their war on terror and with domestic safety issues, in order to get the American people to agree with it for what the administration felt would be the greater overall good of the nation's future.

It may be true that Bush, the man, himself may not have had any inclination to attack Iraq before 9/11, but it's fairly obvious that some of the advisors he surrounded himself with wanted exactly that, and 9/11 gave them the justification to really push for it.