Democratic quotes about Saddam's WMD's

I was poking around Snopes and came across this page. It's a list of many quotes by Democratic leaders regarding Saddam Hussein's weapons of mass destruction. It lists the quotes and says:

All of the quotes listed above are substantially correct reproductions of statements made by various Democratic leaders regarding Iraqi leader Saddam Hussein's acquisition or possession of weapons of mass destruction. However, some of the quotes are truncated, and context is provided for none of them — several of these quotes were offered in the course of statements that clearly indicated the speaker was decidedly against unilateral military intervention in Iraq by the U.S. Moreover, several of the quotes offered antedate the four nights of airstrikes unleashed against Iraq by U.S. and British forces during Operation Desert Fox in December 1998, after which Secretary of Defense William S. Cohen and Gen. Henry H. Shelton (chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff) announced the action had been successful in "degrad[ing] Saddam Hussein's ability to deliver chemical, biological and nuclear weapons."

Since only "some of the quotes are truncated," that means the rest were not. Since only "several of these quotes were offered in the course of statements that clearly indicated the speaker was decidedly against unilateral military intervention in Iraq by the U.S." it stands to reason that the rest were not. Since only "several of the quotes offered antedate the four nights of airstrikes... in December 1998," the rest did not. And "degrade" does not equate to "eliminate." Even if the quotes were taken out of context, that doesn't mean the people who said those words didn't believe that Saddam had WMD's.

See, here's the deal. The critics of the war in Iraq, or as I think of it, the Iraq campaign in the war against terrorism, are now saying there never were any WMD's. Yet, all these Democratic leaders at one time believed that he had them (and if they didn't then they were lying at the time). It's one thing to say that he had them, but that it wasn't justification for war. It's another thing to say he had them, then turn around and say he didn't just because we haven't found stockpiles of them yet and you don't like the guy running the show, and then say the war was unjustified because Bush lied. The first would require integrity. The second only requires the ability to change your tune to fit your agenda and the willingness to insult my intelligence.