Was UN resolution 1441 impossible to comply with & a deliberate trap to justify military conflict?

Question

The war with Iraq was justified on the basis that Saddam failed to comply with resolution 1441. Specifically this section of 1441:

“Iraqi production and use of weapons of mass destruction (biological weapons, chemical weapons, and long-range missiles), all in violation of U.N. resolutions.”

Saddam failed to explain the Yellow Cake document & denied Iraq had mobile chemical weapons labs. He insisted there were no WMD in Iraq. But the US had 100% proof they existed.

However - We now know the Yellow Cake document was a forgery sourced by Blair before the war.

The mobile weapons labs were really British balloon engines. It was a trap.

Saddam wasn’t lying as the documents were all forgeries created by the US/UK. Many other documents turned out to be forged (e.g. Blair’s dodgy dossier, the 45 mins WMD strike etc)

The only Iraqi that claimed Saddam had WMD was a known con man and a convicted fraudster who said anything we wanted for 2 million dollars.

So was 1441 a total set-up?

Beearmy - where have I said conspiracies? You obviously know very little about Iraq. I'm not defending Saddam, I'm asking if 1441 was a trap. It's not just black & white you understand it.

Pease answer the question. I'm not defending Saddm - he was a evil person.

I'm trying to understand resolution 1441.

Please don't just look at it a Goodies Vs. Baddies. Think about the facts, not your feelings

Arrrggghhhh!!! Read the question. I'm not defending Saddam, attacking the war, defending the UN, talking about CIA budgets, talking about President Carter, talking about dead soldies, talkind about morals, comparing Iraq before to now or anything else.

I'm asking a simple question based on facts that have changed since 1441 came out.

Was 1441 set-up. Perhaps it was and it was a good thing. But do the facts point to Saddam being trapped?

That's it!!!!

Robert S - Saddam was 100% complying with Hans Blix & team. That's why France and the UN refused to support the war.

I'm not quoting conspiracies. Forget everything but the question.

Is that so hard?

Can someone please stop assuming I'm anti-war and answer the specific question only. please use facts, not feelings.

Thanks!

Answer 1

OF COURSE!
Blair and Bush are war criminals who need to be tried at the Hague.
The only FACTS DOC needs are these: they LIED, LIED, LIED and are still LYING!

Answer 2

Well you've answered your own question by already labelling it as a giant conspiracy. You have too much time on your hands. Moving around the pedantics. Saddam killed millions, he DID forge elections and was right to be got rid of.

I also believe the attorney general said the war was legal on previous UN resolutions, not including 1441, that's fact not mindless conspiracies.

The Cold war is still being analysed by academics 16 years after the fall of the Soviet Union, it is far too early to judge the success of the Iraq war.

No doubt your next question will be about the Dianna conspiracy :S

----------------------------------------------------------
However - We now know the Yellow Cake document was a forgery sourced by Blair before the war. NOT FACT

The mobile weapons labs were really British balloon engines. It was a trap. NOT FACT

Saddam wasn’t lying as the documents were all forgeries created by the US/UK. NOT FACT

So was 1441 a total set-up? NO

Saddam killed millions of his own people. FACT
Saddam invaded soverign terrotory on 3 seperate occasions. FACT
Saddam had been in violention of numerourous resolutions. FACT
More than 10 countries were involved in the invasion. FACT

Seems like i'm the one worrying about facts here, so dont let your feelings get in the way...just because it sounds like a good story to believe in corruption. Also there would have been a resolution declaring war on Iraq, it had been agreed, however France had their own agenda where Saddam owed them millions so they decieded to veto ANY resolution with an ultimatium in it. Go look at the facts and indeed come back when you have researched it better.

Answer 3

Fact. The U.N. had a "Cease - Fire" agreement in place, bringing to a conclusion, the First Gulf War.

Fact. When suspicion was raised about WMD, Saddam refused to give straight answers even at the threat of invasion.

Fact. Diplomacy failed. The U.N. was taking bribes from Saddam for the U.N. sanctioned "Food For Oil" porgram -- namely France, Russia and Germany.

Fact. The U.N. since it's inception has to date NEVER won a single war. It's purpose is to bring all conflicts to a standstill, an impass, but never a conclusion.

Fact. Chemical weapons (AKA WMD) were indeed found in Iraq. Small cache's. Left overs from the 1979 Iran/Iraq War.

Fact. Mr. Anderson who was charged with seeking out evidence of those weapons was an appointee of Clinton and therefore may strongly have been working on a slightly different agenda, bringing into question his loyalty and trustworthiness.

Fact. The news media is working on their own agenda. Their reports are often laced with personal opinion and seldom report the whole truth. Frequently they omit truths such as the dramatic increase in public services now available to Iraqi citizens: hospitals, schools, sewage and water treatment facilities. They are now well above prewar levels.

Fact. While the loss of American lives there is most certainly regretable -- around 2,900 after three years of fighting. They pale in comparison to our previous wars. On Average Gen. Patton's 3d Army in 1944, lost almost 1,300 men per month. Between 08 Nov 1944 and 07 Dec 1944, he lost 812 men per day!

Fact. Jimmy Carter gutted the CIA budget and removed most all of our agents working over seas, leaving us to operate blindly.

Given these irrefutable facts, to focus on one VERY small aspect as you have chosen to do is both foolish and quite frankly, stupid. You cannot bury your head in the sand and expect that this will all just go away. It is a mess. It is a mess because you fail to recognize that the the Shiites in Iraq are backed by Iran and Syria and both of those countries stand to gain a great deal finacially if we pull out or fail in our mission to stabilize that region. We'll be paying the devil.

No, it was not a "Set Up." It was guestimation at it's finest -- or worse. The hard facts were scarce. When working in the darkness, even the friendliest of objects tend to turn into the boogie man. And, no one lied. But the dem.s sure waffled. What? You'd give it all back, reinstate Saddam, kiss him and tell him you're sorry, that it was all just a BIG misunderstanding? Hello. time to grow up.

Answer 4

A deliberate trap ? You quote a specific section of UN Resolution 1441 (a reissue of Resolution 687), and that would have been SIMPLE to comply with: Saddam could have just let the UN inspectors in, let them seen EVERYTHING and let them dispose of those weapons.

Instead he played games, keeping Inspectors out of locations and or delaying them for hours.

As others have pointed out, Saddam was also in CONSTANT violation of other UN Resolutions... I spent 3 years monitoring their illegal oil shipments and enforcing the no-fly-zone. I watched them sneak oil to Iran, and I was lit up by SAM radars numerous times.

A TRAP... only in Saddam's mind. And take the "conspiracy" theory stuff and put it where ever he hid the WMD... try Syria.

Answer 5

A few things here
there were a total of 17 resolutions saddam was not in compliance with not just one

Saddam had a habit of kicking un inspectors out of his country, if he had nothignto hide that should not have been an issue

Since 1991 Us aircraft have been shot at almost weekly since the creation of the no fly zones

Saddam talked the talk He himslef wanted the world to belive he had WMD's for posturing purposes, He never expected his bluff to be called

Answer 6

No. It is well documented that Saddam had such weapons in the past as he had used them to kill entire villages of civilians. Saddam played can-and-mouse one too many times. Do you really believe that someone as ruthless as Saddam got rid of all of his chemical weapons?

Answer 7

Maybe, my friend, maybe.
I applaude your free thinking. Keep it up!