Originally posted by: Nitemare
How long were the UN inspectors allowed to inspect? Were they getting shot at? Were they having to play policeman? Were they having to provide humanitarian aid? If you answered yes then you might have a topic to bitch about...
Of course, I remember certain politicians saying that the reason the UN inspectors never found anything was because of obstruction by Saddam's regime, and that this was another reason why Saddam's regime had to go...
Well, its gone. And apparantly we had concrete evidence of the existance of WMDs, even down to satellite photos and phone intercepts to show us where they were... Indeed they were supposed to have them ready and prepped for use, making them a clear danger to their neighbours.
Now it seems that we knew that actually they destroyed them before the war. or that maybe they destroyed them a long time ago. So, if our rationale for war was that we were going to forcible remove their WMD capability, but we knew that they destroyed that *before* the war, then,duh, maybe we didn't need to actually go to war?
Actually, this isn't what I believe. I believe that the war was justified in terms of removing a horrendous regime alone. I would not be at all suprised to find that the regime did in fact have WMDs, and I wouldn't be suprised if it turned out that their remaining stocks were hidden so well that it takes us a long time to find them. I have no problem with this.
I do have a problem with the lying to and manipulation of the public that certain governments have used. I might still give them the benefit of the doubt, if it were not for wolfowitz's recent comments.