" if we already had an effective deterrent against Saddam ever using WMD against "the West" (in any scenario other than as a defence against a "human wave" invasion of Iraq by another country), as you say we did, then the premise that we needed to invade Iraq and unseat Saddam because of WMD is a false one."


Wrong, CarolC, unless you consider human lives other than US troops to be worthless- which I know you do not. Chemical weapons are very effective against a civilian population, such as the Kurds of Kuwait.


The truce terms specified that Saddam would NOT have those weapons, and even 14 years AFTER that he still had them.