None of which alters the track record of either President.

Clinton is represented as the epitomy of reason and a statesman with international vision. Yet in fact within ten months of being made aware of the potential threat posed by Iraq, he has started bombing the place and has the US adopt regime change in Iraq as official government policy - at no time in any of this chain of events does he go the the UN.

Bush on the other hand is represented as being a war-monger, a man that "raced" to war with Iraq. Yet in fact this took over 75% of his first term to achieve (Three years). Unlike Clinton he did go before the UN with regard to the outstanding matters detailed in all those UN Security Council Resolutions that had been ignored by Iraq dating back to 1990. Like Clinton, George W Bush was appraised of the threat, by the same people who had advised Clinton, Bush told the UN and Iraq in very clear terms get this situation resolved or we will act.

A couple of points:
1) Amos - you forgot to add the cloud of misdirection surrounding the notion of Iraq's alleged WMD, all came from UNSCOM Reports.

2) Amos the protests from Iraq that they had disabled their programs in 1998, with regard to the requirements of the UN were irrelevant. Dismantling of Iraq's WMD capability, weapons, agents and development programmes had to be verified. Saddam ordered and made sure such verification was impossible, to such an extent that even today no-one can categorically state that there are no WMD in Iraq.