In such, I also wholeheartedly recommend that some members need to learn how to interpret what said 2002 report mentioned regarding the reasons why there was the possibility of a low probability of WMD present within the invasion target, which was also kindly posted by SkepticOverlord, in the link that you so kindly provided.
The wording is self-evident as is also the "why"....no ambigious leaps to obfuscate were necessary. Simple reading of the wording is all that is and
was required. Moral character is likewise given and based on personal perspectives.
BTW, read what Mr. Blix has said of late...as of two days ago? In such........perhaps that too can further fall under obfuscation?
"Former U.N. Iraq chief arms inspector Dr. Hans Blix.....from his home in Stockholm, Sweden, that he still stands by his claim that Iraqi
strongman Saddam Hussein may in fact have had weapons of mass destruction (WMD) shortly before Operation Iraqi Freedom."
As such, care to elaborate or speculate on where those UN and UNSCOM documented, unaccounted for anthrax and other WMD, that Saddam/Iraq
admitted to having, went or are located? The same documented and unaccounted for WMD information that the UK, France, Russia, Germany, Canada, Spain,
the US, and other nations had.......
[Edited on 15-2-2004 by Seekerof]