Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Alex Stroup
You're equating the method by which Iraq could have avoided the war with the argument by which Bush pressed for it.
The argument was not that we needed unfettered access so that we could find out whether Iraq had them and was developing them but that we needed unfettered access so that we could find what he had and was developing and destroy them.
|
I can see your logic, but still disagree. Bush did present arguments that said he was in possession and was trying to get more. However, he also said (indirectly through the resolutions sought and passed in the UN) that should Saddam allow for the inspections, there will be no war. So rather than equating, I am linking as inseparable.
Condition of cease fire
+ lack of compliance
+ wide spread intelligence claiming WMDs
- Saddam allowing inspection access
= war.
Whether full inspections allowed by Saddam would have led to cries that he was just hiding them effectively....what ifs can go any and every direction. I could say "What if we went into Iraq prior to the last UN resolutions and delays and had found Russian, French, and Chinese equipment?". Lots of scenarios to theorize about.
Edited to add - I do like your speech.