"Some of the first batch of UN inspectors have said that something like 95 percent of Saddam's WMDs were destroyed when the inspectors were there before. So the argument that Saddam has had 12 years of non-compliance is specious."

Your first sentence reference to Iraq's existing stock of WMD is irrelevant - you cannot un-invert science or knowledge - what you can do is establish that the capability, and desire, to go back into production is removed. Your contention in the second sentence has been dis-proven, to the satisfaction of the entire UN Security Council, otherwise why did they pass Resolution 1441 - Iraq has been in non-compliance with ALL UN resolutions passed since the end of "Desert Storm", that is a fact. It is even now in non-compliance with Resolution 1441.

No, my contention is that saying Iraq has had 12 years of non-compliance is a specious argument. Let's start the countdown from the time that the last batch of inspectors left Iraq (at which time, according to them, about 95 percent of Saddam's WMDs were destroyed). When was that, 1998? If so, that would be five years of non-compliance.