Arnie.d said:
I have seen interviews with dutch UN inspectors who worked in Iraq. It is a fact that months before the invasion Iraq was cooperating FULLY and nothing was ever found. But Bush had long decided to attack and nothing was going to change that.
Sure, Saddam had WMD in 1988. After the first Gulf war I'm not so sure. Although not fully cooperating after the first Gulf war it would have been almost impossible for Saddam to make WMD.
I have seen interviews with dutch UN inspectors who worked in Iraq. It is a fact that months before the invasion Iraq was cooperating FULLY and nothing was ever found. But Bush had long decided to attack and nothing was going to change that.
Sure, Saddam had WMD in 1988. After the first Gulf war I'm not so sure. Although not fully cooperating after the first Gulf war it would have been almost impossible for Saddam to make WMD.
Care to provide a link to these interviews? According to this http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/UN_Security_Council_Resolution_1441 Iraq was only partially complying. UN Resolution 1441 called for full compliance. According to Hans Blix, there was a substantial lack of evidence that chemical weapons had in fact been destroyed as Iraq claimed. You can read the resolution in PDF form here http://www.globalsecurity.org/wmd/library/news/iraq/un/index.html
Isn't it interesting that France was against a war, threatened to veto a second resolution, and was selling weapons to Iraq at the same time? Gee, I wonder what they had to gain by not going to war.