Los Angeles ? Democratic presidential hopeful Howard Dean on Monday brushed off the capture of Iraqi dictator Saddam Hussein as meaningless to the war on terrorism and insisted anew that the war to topple him was a costly mistake.

Dean’s remarks came as he and two of his rivals for the Democratic nomination disagreed sharply over the impact of Saddam’s arrest, but agreed on urging a broader, more expensive war on terrorism ranging from enhanced efforts to round up nuclear warheads to more money for fighting AIDS in an effort to cultivate international good will.

Their escalated rhetoric and promises to make the country safer underscored a key challenge facing the party as it enters its nominating season: A majority of Democrats opposed the war in Iraq, but the broader electorate long has viewed Democrats as weaker than Republicans on national security — which may be the main issue next November.

Dean, the front-runner for the Democratic nomination, was unapologetic about his opposition to the war in Iraq, which fueled his surge to the front of the pack.

“Let me be very clear: My position on the war in Iraq has not changed,” the former Vermont governor said in a speech to the Pacific Council on International Policy, a foreign-policy research center in Los Angeles. “The difficulties and tragedies we have faced in Iraq show the administration launched the war in the wrong way, at the wrong time, with in-adequate planning, insufficient help and at extraordinary cost, so far, of $166 billion.”

Dean said Saddam’s capture didn’t ensure a stable and peaceful Iraq, didn’t help defeat the “greater danger” of the al-Qaida terrorist network and did nothing to stop the spread of weapons of mass destruction or the risk that terrorists might use them.

“The capture of Saddam has not made America safer,” Dean said. “The Iraq war diverted critical intelligence and military resources, undermined diplomatic support for our fight against terror and created a new rallying cry for terrorist recruits.”

In a conference call, Sen. Joseph Lieberman of Connecticut, a rival for the nomination who supported the war, called Dean’s remarks “profoundly disappointing.” He said Dean’s refusal to support the war would make him a weak opponent to Bush.

“I fear that the American people will wonder if they will be safer with him as president if Howard Dean cannot understand why the capture of Saddam Hussein has made America safer,” Lieberman said.