Straight up; I was working in an intel section at 21AF from 2000-2003. I was looking at intel reports 12 hours a day for months prior to the invasion.
There was a LOT of stuff that sure seemed to indicate the WMDs in Iraq...all I personally had was a vague disquiet that "something was wrong", that something didn't quite add up, that it was a tactical deception, but nothing concrete to prove the WMD evidence was a fake.
I'm not making this up to clear myself, I really did feel like something was wrong, but I was told by people above me to "shut up and soldier", that I didn't understand what I was looking at, that this was a genuine threat and not a deception.
I was told by my boss, privately, that he shared some of my concerns, but the people above him thought the evidence was pretty clear-cut. So we assumed that the folks in DC had access to further intel that we weren't privy to, and marched on.
Since then, there has been a lot of revisionist history, and CYA, and a lot of people pointing the finger at Bush and denouncing him as an idiot.
But I remember a flood tide of folks convincing him that the threat was there, and a lot of people backing him up, until the WMD were not found, and now he's a dumbass and a lone wolf. Didn't look that way in 2002, though.
But the military ALWAYS obeys the orders of duly constituted civilian authority, even when we think the civilian authority is a bunch of dumbasses, because that's the way things run in the US.
The last time any large numbers of the US military defied the orders of the President was in 1861, when they told Lincoln to take a hike.
That did not turn out well, especially for the officers that defied the President.
To postulate the US military behaving any differently than they did in 2003, involves a POD near 1861, or ASBs.
period.