Why do neocons always suggest that saddam refused to allow UN weopons inspectors into Iraq?

Question

Hans Blix, of the UN was escorted anywhere he wanted to go by saddam, however since bush was chomping at the bit to go to take America to war based on lies, he was the one that ordered the UN weopons inspectors out of Iraq.

Answer 1

The neo-cons have wanted to invade Iraq since the early '90's, but they needed a lot of time to justify an invasion. In all of those years, they made Saddam look bad by falsely accusing him of being a danger to the US when he was more of a danger to Israel (hmmm.) Saddam did not even place Americans on his most hated list; he put Kurds, Israelis, and Iranians as the people who God should have never created. Saddam cooperated with the inspectors and many admitted to it, but the US government made up false flag stories about how Saddam was hiding everything.

Answer 2

This is a long read but it will answer your question.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/theissues/article/0,6512,794275,00.html

Here's a tid-bit:

What was Iraq's previous record of compliance?

Not good. Unscom was forced out of Iraq in 1992, when mobs attacked the weapons inspectors. They did return, but were denied access to various buildings and in 1997 Iraq expelled all US inspectors. A compromise was negotiated, the inspectors returned and were again barred from certain sites.

The then US president, Bill Clinton, warned he would carry out a military attack on Iraq. A diplomatic struggle to avert war ultimately failed, amid claims that Iraq was holding information back from the UN and allegations backed by Unscom scientists that it had weaponised VX nerve gas - something Baghdad had always denied. In October 1998 Iraq ceased all cooperation with Unscom. It resumed it in November but in December the bombing began.

-
I don't feel it was the "neocons" as you put it, that suggested Saddam refused weapons inspectors into Iraq.

Answer 3

go ahead and use the revisionist blogs to support the BS
here is a Dem's documented words:
"TESTIMONY OF
RICHARD L. ARMITAGE
Deputy Secretary of State

IRAQ WEAPONS INSPECTORS' REPORT
TO THE UNITED NATIONS
Hearing Before the
Senate Foreign Relations Committee
January 30, 2003

Mr. Chairman, Members of the Committee.
Commission, which carried out inspections in Iraq for the better part of a decade, Iraq possesses some 25,000 liters of anthrax. That is, for the record, more than 5 million teaspoons of anthrax. And we have no idea where any of it is. Saddam Hussein has never accounted for one grain of it.

UN Security Council Resolution 1441, Iraq’s last chance to disarm, Iraq has refused to hand over or destroy its chemical and biological weapons; Iraq has refused to identify the location and fate of its considerable stocks of anthrax, botulinum toxin, VX, sarin, and mustard gas; Iraq has refused to surrender its mobile biological capabilities, which are essentially germ laboratories tucked into the back of a Mack truck; and Iraq has refused to account for tens of thousands of empty -- and full -- chemical and biological warheads. And, mind you, these are just the materials and the weapons we know about, just some of what UNSCOM catalogued in 1999 after inspectors were kicked out of Iraq in 1998. We do not know what Saddam Hussein may have amassed in the years since."

Answer 4

WASHINGTON---Today’s announcement that Iraq will issue visas to International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) inspectors is a welcome development, but the routine inspection that will take place is no substitute for the comprehensive, intrusive inspections that are needed, according to the Nuclear Control Institute (NCI).



“The Agency will be permitted to verify the location of Iraq’s declared nuclear materials,” said NCI President Paul Leventhal, “but there should be no confusion: Iraq is not granting the IAEA total access. Many crucial issues about Saddam’s bomb program will remain unresolved---including the whereabouts of three complete sets of nuclear-bomb components, lacking only the fissile material to make them operational. Iraq must be required to permit inspectors to look anywhere, anytime, and must answer all unresolved questions.”

Answer 5

Hans Blix was allowed to go wherever he wanted. All he had to do was tell Saddam where he wanted to go, wait a few hours while anything illegal was moved to another location, and Han's got to tour the absolute cleanest areas in all of Iraq. Wasn't that nice of Saddam?

Answer 6

That's two lies - - - Blix was allowed into Iraq, but he was constantly given the run around in terms of specific requests for specific locations.

Look, they did find some WMDs and evidence of WMD development, just old WMDs and development at a very early stage. And late-stage development for biological weapons, we're talking about labs in vans - - Osama got away with his entourage, I'm sure a few vans could have made it to Syria. And internal Iraqi government documents do discuss weapons programs. Unless they were potemkin villages, which would make you wonder why Saddam would do that, then that means that weapons programs did exist.

Those are the facts. I'm not saying there were massive stockpiles ready to use against the US or that we should have gone to war. I'm just saying don't overstate your case. Saddam was in repeat violation of the terms of his surrender from the last Gulf War and if he hadn't been, he's still be in power today. Now, does that mean we should have responded the way we did? No. But keep in mind also that a lot of people, including Hillary Clinton and John Kerry, supported going in when we did.

Don't overstate your case and argue that Iraq was just sitting there doing no one any harm and Bush on his own created this situation. It's not a good situation and he has mismanaged it but don't overstate that.

Answer 7

Saddam was reluctant to allow unrestricted access to the weapons inspectors. This gave at least a perception that he wasn't allowing the inspectors to selected areas of the country and that he might have been hiding something.

Answer 8

Ironically, those most critical of America over the relative absence of WMDs also happen to have been the most sympathetic toward Saddam’s manipulative shell games that made the war necessary in the first place. Their shallow and unbalanced moralizing gave the dictator confidence that the American President would never follow through with his threats to hold his government accountable under the WMD inspections agreements that it signed. Saddam never believed that he would wind up in a spider hole or in a hangman's noose.

Answer 9

You know history of Iraq did not start in January 2001. I think you need to bone up on yours. It's just the prior 10 years, it really won't hurt too much.

Answer 10

Yeah right, and Hans Blix got unfettered access to every location he wanted to see when he wanted to see it. You saw just as the rest of the world saw the shell game Saddam played with the UN.

This question is an insult to our intelligence.