Iraq "had disassembled all its mass-destruction arsenal by the time Bush got into office" - Eh? That was definitely not known as of March 2003, read the final report of Dr. Hans Blix to the UN Security Council.

So "Bush did NOT take action to remove the threat."

Now what was that threat again Amos? The one identified by Congress and by the Intelligence and Security Agencies:

Undisclosed International Terrorist Organisation hostile to the USA + Undisclosed "Rogue" Regime or Government hostile to the USA + WMD arsenal, technology or materials.

Possible candidates for the role of "rogue state" came up with a number of countries, Iraq topped both evaluations as being most likely. Those evaluations had nothing to do with GWB or his administration, the President's White House Iraq Team reviewed the findings of the evaluations carried out by others.

Bush went to the UN, whereas in 1998 Clinton just attacked Iraq.

Because of the actions taken by President George W. Bush:

- Iran (Candidate for "rogue state") suspended it's uranium enrichment programme.

- Libya (Candidate for "rogue state") abandoned it's WMD programmes which included a very advanced nuclear weapons programme that nobody knew about.

- North Korea (Candidate for "rogue state") came back to six nation talks to negotiate abandonment of its nuclear weapons programme.

- Dr A. Q. Khan's illegal nuclear proliferation activities brought to light and halted.

- Iraq (Candidate for "rogue state") now with absolute certainty no longer pursues programmes aimed at the development and manufacture of WMD and their delivery system. Iraq no longer sponsors international terrorist organisations.

And that according to you is a man not taking action to address the threat to his country - I'd say that he had done rather a lot -- He most certainly "attacked2 the correct part of the equation.