Perhaps by people like the President? Note in his SOTU address he pointed out the atrocities going on in Iraq on the Iraqi people, however the only reason for war given was if Hussein did not disarm. Or do you doubt the President?
We will consult. But let there be no misunderstanding: If Saddam Hussein does not fully disarm, for the safety of our people and for the peace of the world, we will lead a coalition to disarm him.-- President Bush 1/28/03Note he does not say the Armed For will go to free the Iraqi people, nor does he say to establish a democracy in Iraq, nor does he say to occupy territory in the Middle East to be a 'stabilizing' force. What he does say the reason for going is to disarm Hussein. So unless a massive amount of WMDs are found we have a problem. Well not we necessarily, I know what I believe. But are you supposed to believe this statement from the President of these United States? Or the National Review?
Any amount found is not SUBSTANTIVE. There will always be a higher bar to hurdle, won't there?
No I don't doubt the President. Saddam didn't "fully disarm", and we went to war.
He didn't "fully disarm" because - just as one example - Blix found a drone (banned by the UN resolution) which wasn't accounted for in Iraq's report (required by the UN resolution).
What he does say the reason for going is to disarm Hussein. So unless a massive amount of WMDs are found we have a problem.
Says who? Saddam didn't "disarm", and we went. What's the problem?