I'm still puzzled why so many Americans appear to take as a mortal affront the fact that France refused to fall in line with the wishes of the regime in Washington.

It's not as if they suddenly did a u-turn - all along they said that war could only be a last resort when all other avenues had been exhausted. Which is essentially what Tony Blair had told everyone, except that he didn't mean it.

"Serious consequences" did not imply going to war, and it is not honest to claim that it did. Country after country voting form it made it quire clear at the time that it was not a tripwire for automatic war, without the Security Council having teh final say.

Essentially it was a warning that military force could be one of the options to be considered and voted on, if there was insufficient compliance by Iraq. The resolution left the decision in the hands of the Security Council. And the majority of Security Council members, including three of the five permanent members, were not satisfied that all other avenues had been exhausted, when the USA and the UK went to war.