Hillary's Problem With Renouncing Her Support For Attacking Saddam

Christopher Hitchens in Slate lays out chapter and verse of Hillary's problem and her refusal to declare her vote authorizing our attack on Iraq. The core of the problem for her is that in 1998, hubby Bill advocated and signed the "Iraq Liberation Act". She also spoke forcefully of the danger she believed Saddam posed for the West in October 2002:

In the four years since the inspectors left, intelligence reports show that Saddam Hussein has worked to rebuild his chemical and biological weapons stock, his missile delivery capability, and his nuclear program. He has also given aid, comfort, and sanctuary to terrorists, including al-Qaida members, though there is apparently no evidence of his involvement in the terrible events of September 11, 2001.

This also raises the question that will not be asked of Barack Obama in the run up to the Democratic nomination, why did he believe invading Iraq was wrong in 2002 - 2003? Is there a record of his opposition and rationale? Did he alone among our political leaders see through the faulty intelligence and into the impossibility of the post war internecine warfare? If so, he should be bragging about it. He may indeed possess the stuff of greatness.