04-22-2004, 01:59 AM
Quote:-the UN agreed that saddam had weapons of mass destruction, because everyone knew he had them, it was common knowledge.
-saddam did not comply with UN inspectors, he was supposed to take the inspectors to all of his WMD and show that he was destroying them. instead, he let them take a look around without helping them, and sometimes even hindering them.
-saddam couldve easily put his weapons in a few 18-wheelers and drive them accross the border into one of his allied countries
-they found several labs and storage facilities that were obviously for developing and building chemical weaponry, making it painfully obvious that saddam had them at one time and was hiding them from the UN
WTF. This probably is a good example of your goverment giving you false information. The UN has not agreed that Iraq has WMD (or are you talking about 10 years ago). Their weapons inspectors did not find any proof of WMD and in their final report they stated that they believe that there are no WMD left in Iraq (and they were right). The weapons inspectors were allowed to go to every place they wanted. They were followed by Iraq government officials who maybe had a little influence but they were allowed to go where they wanted and where the US said that there would be WMD but there weren't. You should remember that the UN voted against invading Iraq (not like Bush cares what other's say) and that should say enough.
Saddam COULD have driven them across the border but you don't attack a country on basis of what they COULD have done. You MUST have proof to take drastic measures like Bush did. Those labs you are talking about had no toxic materials left nor was there any proof that they were used for WMD. They COULD have been used for that but they could also be used for making hairgell or whatever.