I know that it is inconvenient Bobert, due to your selective memory of events, but UN Security Council Resolution 1441 was passed unanimously because every member sitting on the Council at that time fully believed the following to be true in part or in toto:

1. Iraq still possessed WMD
2. Iraq still possessed the means to manufacture WMD
3. Iraq was still pursuing programmes intent on further developing it's WMD capability
4. Iraq had not complied with the requirements of previous UNSC Resolutions relating to verifiable disarmament as agreed at Safwan

Now what information led those people sitting on the UN Security Council and their respective governments to vote the way they did? The primary source of intelligence that indicated that Iraq still possessed WMD and the capability to produce WMD was the contents of the UNSCOM Report presented to the UN Security Council in January 1999. Two people mentioned by Bobert in his post were authors/contributors to this report - Scott Ritter and Dr. Hans Blix.

It was the contents of that UN Report that provided the world-wide belief that Iraq still possessed WMD, not anything said by either George W Bush, or by Tony Blair, who were only given what their respective security and intelligence agencies believed to be the case. That couples intelligence information to situation assessment in an attempt to predict future potential threat. US post 911, any administration would have had great difficulty explaining why any other than worst case scenario should be looked at.

While Scott Ritter may have suffered a change of mind between his last visit to Iraq and 2002, Hans Blix most certainly did not. Reading through the reports presented to the UNSC in the run up to the events of late March 2003 at no time at all does Dr. Hans Blix EVER state that the UNMOVIC inspection teams are receiving the full pro-active co-operation of the Iraqi authorities (A keystone requirement under the terms of UNSCR 1441 from day one). Of course under certain circumstances in individual instances the Iraqi Authorities did co-operate, i.e. normally when they had no other choice (example: After the UNMOVIC discovery of 384 recently imported rocket motors that should never have been there in the first place).

As to learning to fly Bobert, I agree, it requires no great amount of intelligence, I went solo in a "a joy-stick taildragger" de Havilland Chipmunk, after about seven hours of instruction. But while I could walk up to the aircraft, climb into it, take-off, fly round and then land it, there is absolutely no way that I would lay any claim as to being able to "fly" the aircraft. Now Lt. G. W. Bush of the Texas National Air Guard did rather more than that didn't he Bobert? He didn't just learn to fly a supersonic, all-weather interceptor, he learned to fight the aircraft, qualifying as being operational in the top 5% of his intake on type. Now that Bobert, takes a bit of doing, now if for whatever reason you cannot, I for one would give the man a bit of credit for the accomplishment.

Ron regarding this so called Vietnam combat experience do you have any sources, or is this just another baseless slander?