Iraq: a threat or not?

If you asked John Kerry his answer to the question, well... Judge for yourself from his statements in the second debate (as found on Wizbang's blog and Debates.org:

"Well, let me tell you straight up: I've never changed my mind about Iraq. I do believe Saddam Hussein was a threat. I always believed he was a threat. Believed it in 1998 when Clinton was president. I wanted to give Clinton the power to use force if necessary."

Alright. That's pretty clear. Saddam was a threat, Kerry always believed he was, and he would've authorized Clinton using force to get rid of Saddam. However, just a few statements later, Kerry says this about Iran:

"I don't think you can just rely on U.N. sanctions, Randee. But you're absolutely correct, it is a threat, it's a huge threat.

And what's interesting is, it's a threat that has grown while the president has been preoccupied with Iraq, where there wasn't a threat.

So within a matter of a few minutes, Kerry apparently changes his mind about Iraq. According to that statement, he believes there wasn't a threat in Iraq. These statements simply CANNOT BE RECONCILED!!! No excuse of "nuances" (a word I've heard to dismiss Kerry's constant contradictions) will ever reconcile them. Kerry is a flip-flopper and he would be a greater danger to this country than the liberals claim President Bush is now. It's so obvious. I wish more people would admit it.