CASE CLOSED:

Saddam's missiles give the game away (The Scotsman, 21 Mar 2003)

WAR is a last resort, and always should be. So no-one can take any pleasure in the events now unfolding in Iraq. Those who reject war on any grounds whatsoever will not be assuaged. But those who see armed force as sometimes - regrettably - required to maintain security, or defend human rights, will find that the situation unfolding in Iraq justifies their position. Yesterday, as the liberation of Iraq began, the crumbling Saddam Hussein regime fired salvoes of missiles at Allied troop concentrations in Kuwait. It was the most eloquent admission by the Iraqi dictatorship that it had been taking the UN weapons inspectors for a ride for the last three and a half months.

Under UN Security Council Resolution 687, passed in 1992, Saddam should have destroyed his Scud and long-range missiles. Clearly, he did not. Under Resolution 1441, he was to declare where the remaining missiles were. Clearly, he did not. Some of yesterday?s attacks may have been made using the new al-Samoud rockets which the UN inspectors also wanted destroyed. Saddam prevaricated and only let 70 be sawn up. He went slow on destroying the rest, though they could all have been dispatched in a day. Now they are being used to try to kill British service men and women.

The moral of this sordid tale, as the fighting escalates in Iraq, is that Saddam Hussein is a proven liar. He will not disarm peaceably. He will not obey UN resolutions. He never has done. He never will. His regime can only be disarmed by force.

Don't the French, Chinese, Germans, Hans Blix, Tom Daschle, etc. owe the coalition an apology? Posted by Orrin Judd at March 20, 2003 9:12 PM