Honestly, the ``lots of small offenses'' argument is the only one that makes sense to me (regardless of the international support issue), and it makes a not unreasonable amount of sense. I still wouldn't have supported it, as I believe that only one of the ``small offenses'' is true.

Too bad it was an argument that the Bush administration used only when all of it's big red herrings proved to be untrue, and then tried to retcon and claim that's what they said the whole time.

(Note that I'm not intending to say that massive human rights violations, etc. are really ``small offenses''. I'm just paraphrasing the idea of ``there are a bunch of reasons that all add up to cause''.)