Honestly I do have to say that back in 2003 the entire rationale for invading Iraq struck me at the time as being a fanciful construction of unbounded wild speculation and about an ounce of real but very inconclusive intelligence, I figured they must have had more but it turned out they really didn't. Still, it's one of those things like diving into water, once you start, you're committed. It did rid the world of one dictator who would have liked to be everything Bush, Powell and Rumsfeld painted him to be, so it wasn't a total loss. The only deception involved was self-deception by the leadership, though, not a willful misleading of the public, and the political strategy for handling the place after the main force military operations was equally based on wishful thinking. I hold none of that against G. W. Bush, the Democrats invested just as much belief into the information gulf that was Iraq as he and the GOP did, and however inappropirate and naive his political ideology proved for the actual situation on the ground (Shared as they were by the, umm, 'Adaptable' Colin Powell) they were at least sincerely-held beliefs about the world-wide power and appeal of Western-style secular democracy.
The Dems, on the other hand, always strike me as just plain intentionally lying to get to an undisclosed end of their own.