Iraq War: Weapons Inspectors?

Question

Okay, I have heard a lot of Democrats say that Bush should have let Blix and the weapons inspectors do their job in Iraq. My question is how exactly? They were being banned from going to any recent sites and being told when and where to go. How could they find WMDs that way, or anything else incriminating for that matter. Any thoughts?

Hey Pops, ever wonder why Blix complained about not being allowed into certain sites. Oh ya, I guess Al Frankin didn't tell you that one, right.

Answer 1

What you are likely to get on here is a load of malarky from Bush haters and liberals about how it was all a lie. I will try to answer this without rewriting history even though I am not a fan of Bush or the war.

1. Yes it is true. Most all the intelligence agencies in the world thought he had WMD this is largely due to the fact that he had been in non-compliance with the inspections regime for 12 years or so.

2. The difference between Bush and Clinton pon this issue is that Clinton bombed Iraq and Bush invaded.

3. Saddam was bluffing because he wanted to be feared in the region and he wanted to scare the USA into not wanting to invade him due to the idea that he would attack our troops with WMD. His plan failed miserably. He did make token steps in late 2002 -early 2003 but he refused entry to key sites.

4. Let us not fall into a tit for tat about whether he had them or Bush really thought he did or lied or whatever. There is a more important issue at hand here. That issue is whether or not we should have PRE-EMPTIVE WAR as a part of our policy.

You see if Bush had not invaded nobody would really care about the way he read or misread the intelligence. We would not be there and this whole argument would be moot.
But he DID invade. So in light of the invasion and the way it has played out among other things do you think that we should engage in pre-emptive war.

You see Bush's opponents(or most of them) tend to either rewrite history ignoring the FACT that he di go to the UN and get a resolution as well as get authorization from Congress BEFORE he invaded. Thgis is convenient for them because it allows them to ignore the fact that everybody knew he was going to invade, they(the UN and Congress) had access to all the same intelligence and they still authorized thw use of force knowing it would mean invasion. This means that THEY ARE RESPONSIBLE AS WELL. I don't think Bush was right but I am not about to let the rest of the people who supported this policy get off the hook .

5. It is up to you to decide if you think the inspections/sanctions that were in place would have worked in time or if you think 12 years of cat and mouse was enough. That is an academic judgement with little bearing on the future. What is important is whether or not you support pre-emptive war because if you do then you will support future attacks on sovereign nation-states such as Iran or even China if you believe that they MAY be threatening.

Now I will let the rest of the Bush bashers and bandwagon liberals tell you that they think you are a fool for even thinking about the subject in the first place and keep ignoring the Democrats responsibility in all of this.

I hope I answered your question.
PEACE

Answer 2

Both the Clinton and Bush administrations dropped the ball there. When Mr. Blix and company were turned away from sites they wanted to inspect, that place should have turned into a smoking hole in the ground as soon as the inspectors were clear.

The failure of both presidents to act in a timely manner is one of the reasons we are stuck with this war now. Sadam acted like he had WMD's, even if he didn't.

I get tired of hearing both parties pointing the finger at each other when they are both to blame for letting things go too far.

Answer 3

Pops is right! I watched Blix report to the UN and also on the news in 2002 when this was all happening. Once again, you're believing the made up lies of Bush, Cheney, Rumsfeld, Wolfowitz, and Rove. Oh how I wish Colin Powell would say more! Now THERE'S a Republican I could vote for!!!

Answer 4

The WDM was just needed as an excuse to go to war. (meanwhile we also know there were no WDM)

Therefor, the whole notion of blix and his crew in iraq was irrelevant. Of course it was in bush's interest not to be patient or let Blix work because he might have come up with the answer there are no WDM's ...

Answer 5

Since the UN inspectors are not under American command how could Bush order them out? And we found shells loaded with nerve agents and the means to product more of them as soon as the sanctions were lifted.

Answer 6

Because it's a fact. Bush was the one who pulled the inspectors out without letting them finish the job (to their objection). It was sources like Fox news and Rush that made you guys think Saddam kicked them out when he didn't.

BTW, how many WMD's did we find?

Why did Blix say then, and afterward that there were no WMD's?

Answer 7

They were not being as limited as you suggest. Also, Iraq covers a large area an in order to inspect for WMD's, more time was needed, but all of the intelligence gathered at the time was pointing to there being no WMD's, and thus Bush lied the United States into an needless war. Besides, WMD's or not, Iraq was never a threat to the security of the United States.

Answer 8

Think about this.
When the US invaded Iraq, they approached at the beach head. Upon taking the beach head, they consolidated their positions.
All those US military personal, all in one location for days.

Exactly when do you think it would be a good time to use weapons of mass destruction?

That's if you actually had them.

Saddam had given almost cart Blanche to the UN WI.

And the evidence was not looking good for the Bush administration.

Hence, the reason for Bush to stop the support for the UN WI, and inflate the claims of immanent threat of attack.

Funny thing about the threat of attack, the US military would have to deploy to Iraq to be with-in the line of weapons release of the Iraq forces.

George is a funny guy.

Answer 9

Hate crowd is not interested in finding out what happened to the chemical weapons Clinton said Saddam had.