Roger, I remember that a lot of experts said that Iraq most probably didn't have any weapons of mass destruction. The reason why it was widely believed that such WMDs didn't exist was precisely because of the sanctions that had been imposed on Iraq for many years by President Clinton. I remember that the UN was really skeptical that Iraq had any significant WMDs. In Sweden, we had a man, Hans Blix, who had worked for the UN before, inspecting Iraq for WMDs. He hadn't found any. Another Swede, whose name I have unfortunately forgotten, had also worked for the UN as a weapons inspector in Iraq. I once had the opportunity to listen to this man and ask him how the inspections were carried out. He told us many interesting details, for example how he oversaw the inspection of flood water in the Tigris and other floods. The inspectors were looking for the kind of chemicals that would be there if Saddam was trying to build a bomb. They also continually took samples of water and soil to look for increased radioactivity. They never found anything.
I remember that Hans Blix expressed the opinion that Iraq probably didn't have significant WMDs. The UN decided that Hans Blix would go to Iraq with a number of inspectors to look for WMDs. If Saddam didn't let them in, the UN would automatically OK a military attack on Iraq.
The inspectors were let in. They looked. They found nothing. They wanted to keep looking. But after a while, President Bush said that the inspections were a waste of time and that it was time to take decisive action. Most of the allies of the United States didn't dare to contest the U.S. over this. The weapons inspectors were pulled out of Iraq, and the United States attacked.
Right or wrong, Roger, it is certain that the international approval of the U.S.A. has plunged precipitously over this. Perhaps it will turn out to have been the right thing to do after all. Only time will tell.
