sushi854 said:
Although this view may be unpopular, I feel that the threat posed by Iraq's alleged WMD's should be the least important reason (among those frequently cited by the administration, anyways) for attacking Iraq. Even if chemical and/or biological agents are ultimately found in Iraq, I highly doubt that the regime possessed the giant slingshot necessary to deliver such weapons. With regard to terrorist access to such weapons, the stuff would still have to be smuggled into the US, and most of it could be manufactured in a basement laboratory with the proper funding. Besides, if WMD's are such a threat to the current administration, why is North Korea still running its mouth?
To an extent, I agree. Saddam Hussein needed to be removed simply because he was/is a heinously cruel and crazed individual unfit to be left in charge of a pet store, much less a small nation. Saddam's reign should have ended in 1991. Regardless of who is to blame for leaving Saddam in power, the fact remains: we should have removed the Butcher of Baghdad the FIRST time we had the chance. We ("we" meaning the entire coalition involved in the original Gulf War) did not, and since that time millions of Iraqis have paid the price. This error was in desperate need of correction. Saddam had to go. Period.
You raise an excellent point in regards to chemical WMD. The components to make chemical weapons are relatively easy to obtain and combine, should someone have the knowledge and some simple equipment. It's also fairly common knowledge that Iraq did not have a functioning nuclear weapons program, thanks in large part to a brave Israeli pilot who perished in the recent space shuttle tragedy.
The WMD that I believe the American government was correct in worrying about is the third type: biological weaponry. Although not as immediately destructive as the "N" or "C" in "NBC warfare," biological agents have the potential to create a medical crisis of staggering proportions, which would be greatly compounded by public panic. While custom-made biological agents are extremely difficult to
create, they are relatively simple to transport. A live culture of a biological agent could be hidden almost anywhere, in anything. Furthermore, in many instances all one needs is a tiny live sample of a biological agent to create far more of the same living weapon. Even worse is the potential for the use of such an agent as a suicide weapon. Imagine the death toll and panic if even a handful of infected terrorists touched down at various airports around the nation, and set about visiting various tourist attractions. Should Saddam Hussein's regime have acquired or created such weapons, he would have been all too happy to either use them himself, or give/sell them to the likes of Osama bin Laden or other such terrorist scum. As was clearly evidenced by his actions against even his own people, Saddam Hussein was a man entirely devoid of moral or ethical principles. I'm not trying to claim that Saddam was actually in possession of biological weapons... but if it turns out that he was, we may have saved the Western world from an unimaginable catastrophe.
North Korea is a different matter entirely, even though Kim Jong Il is a monster on par with Saddam Hussein. Under Kim Jong Il's leadership, the North Korean government spent billions of dollars developing nuclear weapons over the last 10 years- while the people of his nation were so wracked by famine that many resorted to cannibalism simply to stay alive. The thought of such a man possessing nuclear arms is chilling, to say the least... however, one factor separates him from Saddam Hussein: Kim Jong Il is capable of rational thought and, unlike Saddam, is unwilling to risk martyrdom. Furthermore, North Korea has China to worry about. The two nations are allies in name... but imagine China's reaction should North Korea take unwise action. Peace in the region works in China's favor, and they are certainly willing to stress that point militarily, if necessary. By contrast, Iraq had no neighboring second-tier superpower to check its actions. North Korea may well need to be dealt with militarily... but such action would likely involve surgical air strikes to disable North Korea's nuclear capabilities, (and their ability to shell Seoul) rather than a full-scale invasion. Hopefully, it won't come to that.
