This is a read-only archive. Find the latest Linux articles, documentation, and answers at the new!

Re:Sophmoric drivel

Posted by: Anonymous Coward on July 14, 2004 01:40 PM
Well you aren't quite correct. Iraq has pretty much been in continual violation of the cease fire for the better part of a decade, but no one felt bothered enough to send troops back to enforce it. Too many more pressing things (in our minds) at that time. Even though, after the first Gulf War they discovered that Iraq was much closer (within a year of having nuclear weapons) than previously thought. (Of course 9/11 caused many to reevaluate those aforementioned priorities.)

The weapons inspectors WEREN'T in Iraq as you claim, as the cease fire agreement of 1991 required. In fact they hadn't been in Iraq since 1998, gone almost 5 years continuously, and this wasn't the first time Saddam had refused to cooperate. Only after the US was ready to go to war did Iraq let inspectors in briefly for a couple months, even then they did not recieve "full cooperation" (their words, not mine). Basically, Saddam did a great job gaming the system, Lots of promises of cooperation, but he avoided actually having to deliver on any of them over the course of about 13 years.

That's why I personally don't buy that Bush drummed up this whole thing. Do we now have proof that Saddam had (at least at the time of the invasion) a massive stockpile of WMDs? No, but the prudent assumption, based on a combination of limited intelligence, past behavior, and current behavior was to assume that he still had stockpiles and was continuing to expand his program. History will be the ultimate arbiter of whether this turned out to be the correct course of action.


Return to Commentary: 'Fahrenheit' 98, 2000, and XP