>First of all, it was never the UN's responsibility to "hunt" for the weapons. The UN was there to "confirm" disarmament, with a willing government. Iraq was not a willing government.
It could be arugued that since the UN wasn't able to find any WOMD and the missles that they did find that flew 15 miles too far were immediately destroyed by the Iraqi's that they were being cooperative and they may not actually have WOMD.
>When the UN went to South Africa for disarmament inspections, South Africa proved to them through documentation and cooperation that they had no more weapons of mass destruction. South Africa wasn't playing a cat and mouse game like Iraq.
It's only a cat and mouse game if they actually have WOMD. That hasn't been proven beyond a reasonable doubt.
>Let me repeat this again(for your thick skull) It is not the UN's charter to disarm Iraq, it was up to Iraq to prove this to the UN, and they failed. Hans Blix is loved by France(sold nuclear reactor and illegal munitions), Germany(built Saddam's bunkers) and Russia(sold jamming equiptment, provided training), because they knew he was going to draw things out.
Ahhh, so Blix, France, Germany and Russia all have alterior motives when it comes to Iraq but there's no possible way the US has them?
>17 blown resolutions is enough. Now the big leader with all his temples and effigies of himself is paying for it.
17 resolutions is enough? Interesting. Israel leads the world in broken resolutions at, I think (don't quote me on this), around 40+. They also have WOMD (nukes). They are killing Palestinians daily. They killed an American peace protester less than a month ago by driving over her with a bulldozer and then backing over her again just to make sure. And they shot another american peace protester in the face just a few days ago.
Israel seems to fit your conditions for an invasion. Do you support an invasion of Israel?
>Why didn't we do this earlier? I totally agree with you, we should have done it long ago, I guess after this comment you have no problem doing this, since your argument is "we should have done this before, why now?".
I've never said "we should have done this before, why now?" I've only asked "Why Iraq? Why now?". Meaning there are a lot of countries with bad people running them, and there's a lot of countries that have WOMD. What's so special about the Iraq situation that makes it stand out above all the other nations and requires an immediate disarmament and regime change?
>Let's not forget one thing here Babar, the Iraqis aren't like us, the reason they(Arab countries) have brutal dictators, is because that's what a lot of them respect. They don't respect peace marchers like you, they really don't. They respect power and force, and that's what they are getting now. We will drag them into the 21st century.
Sorry, but that has to be the lamest thing I've read on this board.
>Remember, it was your hero Bill Clinton that taught us, we are a "world community" now and can't just ignore problems in the world. If we ignore them, who else has the power do do the right thing?
Bill Clinton is not my hero.
We weren't ignoring Iraq, we were dealing with them in a peaceful manner. He wasn't a threat to anybody and there was no need for an invasion. The situation was completely under control.....except of course for the oil.
This comment was edited on Apr 9, 12:41.