Source.

Interesting article. If it's true, then:
1. The US administration was right, Saddam did have links to terror;
2. The US administration was right, WMD were being made in Iraq;
3. HOWEVER, by failing to attack a known terrorist in a known location in Iraq, the US administration revealed to going to war with Iraq was more important than combating terrorism.

There are so many ways to spin this one it makes one dizzy.

Not so. Saddam had little or no control over that part of Northern Iraq. These terrorists opposed him.

If they attacked the terrorist camp it could have been considered an act of war against Iraq, since the camp was in their territory. And (correct me if I'm wrong) the first time they debated about it weren't the US still hoping for the UN to approve their plan on attacking Iraq? That could go for the first debate, and then the other two could be that they wanted to take them down during the Iraq war.

Wasn't this done around the same time as the U.S. took out terrorists traveling via car in Yemen? It wasn't an act of war against Yemen.

It's obviously Clinton's fault. ;)

Saddam paid 25000 usa $ to suisiders in israel, so he is connected to the terror.
As any dictator is.