Well, here's where we simply disagree. I see Bush's actions as justified. Maybe not for all the reasons the Administration tried to use as their arguments prior to the war. Was there some shortcutting going on with the Administration's prewar arguments, I believe there was. I agree with you that it is quite possible that the Administration concluded that the "selling" of the war to the American people had to be kept simple. And that the sales job was a deliberate distortion. I would definitely be open minded to that argument.
But that is a different argument than saying the Bush Administration had no reason to invade Iraq, and thus Bush was "unjust" in his aggression. The Bush Administration, like the Clinton Administration before them, had just reasons to depose Saddam. At least that's what President Clinton signed off on.
Just because Clinton agreed that it was a just cause, doesn't mean that he thought it was practical. He could easily have believed that it was simply too big of a can of worms to open so late in his Presidency. There are reasons why Clinton, and Poppa Bush before him, deferred to the extent they could regarding deposing Saddam in Iraq. They didn't want to get stuck in the briar patch.