... rather than "He lied to us before, so we can now invade and see if he is lying again".
Uh... we had MORE than sufficient cause to overthrow Saddam in 1995 when he was FLAGRANTLY found in violation... But the previous administration chose not to do so..
Instead, US servicemen have been required to continue flying over the skies of Iraq, and we've been required to maintain an embargo and economic containment of Iraq, for which the US, not the UN, has been blamed.
And now were "stuck" in a situation where we can't disengage from the committments obtained by the UN, and the UN doesn't want us to enforce their binding resolutions in a forceful manner... but rather to merely maintain Saddam in a box (at our expense)...
He has lied to us before... and that means he cannot be trusted to declare everything he is supposed to.. Like Blix stated, Iraq (Saddam), UNLIKE SOUTH AFRICA, has not acknowledged their responsibilities towards disarming..
When Saddam has his intelligence agents pose as Iraqi scientists, that strikes me as ACTIVE RESISTANCE and SUBTERFUGE to defy the inspection process..
Thus, the inspections are useless. Like any legal inquiry, if the respondent refuses to share documentations and evidence, then criminal indictment is generally the only recouse. And with indictment comes enforcement, apprehension, and incarceration..
Hawk |
