The "caring" part is obvious and mutual. Aside from the usual suspects, virtually everyone was in agreement based on the intel at hand from multiple sources, the WMDs were an issue. There was no reason, fiscal or otherwise to "create a narrative" justifying a war with no end game or benefits. The WMD issue was the factor and not the threat on his father. He had the overwhelming support of the Congress and the public. Did they screw it up? absolutely, but your premise the SOLE reason for Iraq was a vendetta, my original posit stands.
why did he have overwhelming support from Congress and the public? Because the narrative created saying they had WMDs.
Did they create the narrative or did he buy into the false information being presented to him? Paul Wolfowitz and Karl Rover were pushing for the invasion of Iraq before 9/11.
