blacksmithn wrote:Unless he's LAPD, a policeman doesn't normally shoot the suspect and then try to determine if he's got a gun.
My point is simply that the failure to find a weapon doesn't mean either that an invasive search was unjustified, or that the entity being frisked didn't have a weapon before he saw the policeman coming.
blacksmithn wrote:Unfortunately, there are many more questions beyond how recently and where they went, although I understand why you'd want to limit the argument to just those two suppositions.
There are probably hundreds of questions. So what? People answering posts typically respond to a few issues that seem to them most relevant.
blacksmithn wrote:Although there was an internationally agreed upon system of inspections set up and functioning to determine the answers to your two questions, Shrub was too anxious to pull the trigger to wait for their findings. Once again, that's why the inspectors were forced to cut short their mission and leave Iraq, not because Saddam threw them out.
There had been an internationally agreed upon system of inspections for a dozen years. At many points during the inspections over the years, Hussein had shown an intent to deceive the inspectors. No matter how you present it, impatience with after this length of time cannot be properly described as jumping the gun. It was entirely possible that Hussein was intentionally stalling the inspectors so that he could complete development and stockpiling of WMD. Had this been the case, he might suddenly have either (a) announced that he had enough WMD to obliterate anyone who attempted to interfere with his further development of WMD and that the treaty was therefore abrogated, or (b) simply had agents or associates use WMD in a few American cities killing a million people and then denied responsibility.
blacksmithn wrote:Assuming, arguendo, that Shrub was just too alarmed by the possibilities to wait, then given the fact that the alleged WMDs are nonexistent he was either guilty of
letting his emotions rule his judgement (never a good thing in a leader) or, more charitably, he allowed himself to be misled into believing incompetent intelligence over the reports of the international inspectors he himself countenanced.
Or there was a certain significant probability that Hussein had WMD and/or WMD programs, Bush couldn't take the chance of a terrible calamity down the road, and he reacted properly to the odds. The fact that a suspect frisked by a policeman is found not to have a gun doesn't imply either that the policeman wasn't correct to frisk him, nor that the suspect didn't throw his gun in the bushes when he saw the policeman coming. Hypothetically, if the odds of logical proposition "A" are 25%, and the consequences of proposition A being true are ghastly, and there may be a serious penalty for delaying finding out, then an aggressive investigation is justified. If ultimately that 25% chance turns out to be false, it doesn't mean that a decision not to take the risk wasn't justified. It is entirely possible that Hussein did have WMD and WMD programs, and finally dismantled them or hid them very well only because of Bush's aggressive statements. It is entirely possible that he didn't destroy his WMD, but moved them someplace that makes them very hard to find. It is also entirely possible that Hussein would have cooperated or appeared to cooperate long enough to get sanctions lifted and the spotlight off himself, and then resumed development and production of WMD. When the issue is WMD in the hands of a monster like Hussein, it is a good idea to err on the side of caution, since the consequences of him acquiring these weapons could include the use of WMD in population centers.
blacksmithn wrote:As for the "consequences of allowing Saddam to develop WMDs" please remember the hysterical drumbeat from this administration prior to starting this war,i.e., Saddam already HAD WMDs, tons and thousands of them and delivery systems and facilities for their continued production. The prevarication that he was expanding his capacity to produce more and better was really something of an afterthought, compared to the mountain of misrepresentation regarding Saddam's purported then current capacities that went before.
Regardless of what arguments the administration did or did not make, the consequence of allowing Hussein to acquire and stockpile these weapons, and then also allowing the next group of dictators who tried to do so, could easily have been the use of WMD in western cities. No delivery system is needed. A WMD can be smuggled into the target country and assembled there. Depending on the exact scenario, one single use of one single weapon could obliterate a million people, and grievously injure many more. A few WMD events in the US might turn us into a 3rd world country for a century. These are pretty grave consequences and it was entirely proper of the president to err on the side of caution.
