Alot of misinformation has been posted above. Here are the facts:
Iraq acquired chemical and biological weapon capability with US assistance. (Also many other nations assisted including Canada, but the US was the biggest source of aid). Iraq used their CWs during the Iran/Iraq war.
During this war, the US gave Iraq access to satellite imagery which allowed Iraq to see Iran's military positions and use their CWs more effectively. The US also loaned Iraq military advisors who interpreted this data and provided battle planning assistance. These advisors even went onto the battlefields along side Iraqi officers even on the Iranian side of the border where they reported back to the US their observations regarding Iraq's CW attacks.
In 1988, Iraq began using chemical weapons against Kurdish rebels in Northern Iraq. When some rebels took refuge in Halabja, Iraq's military gased the entire village. When news of this war crime reached the outside world, it was almost universally condemned. The US was one of the few nations which did not condemn this attack. Many nations stopped selling Iraq arms. The US compensated by increasing their Iraq arms sales. Some members of Congress disagreed with this policy, but President Reagan threatened to veto any bill which would punish Iraq for using CWs against civilians or limit the US arm sales and WMD technology to Iraq. The Iran-Iraq war ended August 1988.
United States support for Iraq during the Iran–Iraq war - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
U.S. Diplomatic and Commercial Relationships with Iraq 1980 - 1990 by Nathaniel Hurd
CBC News: the fifth estate - The Forgotten People - One Man's Battle
The US/UK and France imposed the "no fly zones" on Iraq after the 1991 Gulf War. This activity as it was carried out by these nations was not authorized by any UNSC resolution and was illegal. France stopped participating in the late 1990's.
...I took the trouble to ask Dr Boutros Boutros-Ghali, who was secretary-general of the UN when the US and Britain set up the so-called "no-fly zones", in which they dictate whose aircraft can fly. "The Security Council never approved or in any way ratified these zones," he said. Does that make them illegal? I asked. "Yes," he replied...
ITV - John Pilger - Labour claims its actions are lawful while it bombs Iraq, strarves its people and sells arms to corrupt states
The UN Secretary General wasn't the only person aware the "no-fly zones" were illegal. So did the US and UK leadership:
...President Bush's "zero tolerance" for Iraqi violations of UN resolutions has apparently dropped to "two percent tolerance." According to administration officials, Iraqi forces have once again fired on U.S. planes patrolling the no-fly zones in Iraq, which U.S. officials had previously claimed would constitute an immediate justification for invading Iraq, not only under the principle of "self-defense" but also for violation of the recently passed UN resolution.
The Bush administration, however, is backing off and so far is not using the shootings as a "self-defense" excuse to invade Iraq, and so far isn't even taking the matter to the UN Security Council.
There's a very good reason for the government's decision: Despite their mild protestations to the contrary, U.S. officials know that the no-fly zones have been illegal from the get-go. And their decision not to use either "self-defense" or violation of the UN resolution as a justification for invading Iraq is an implicit acknowledgment of that illegality.
The no-fly zones were unilaterally established by the U.S. government after the Persian Gulf War, supposedly to enforce UN resolutions on Iraq. There was one big problem, however: The United Nations never authorized the no-fly zones to be established....
http://www.fff.org/comment/com0211h.asp
If they were legal, the UNSC would have supported US/UK resolutions to invade and occupy Iraq. Instead they regarded Iraq's attempts to shoot down American and British warcraft in Iraqi airspace as legitimate self defense and never authorized the 2003 US led invasion.
Annan Says Iraqi No-Fly Zone Firing No Violation
The US and UK flew an increasing number of sorties into Iraq before the 2003 war crime and bombed Iraqi military installations in an effort to soften up Iraq for invasion and if possible provoke Iraq into war:
The war before the war
New Statesman - The war before the war
EAO, your last attempt to twist the words in the Washington Post is sooooo pathetic....most of the world DID believe Saddam had WMD........because he behaved as if he did....no amount of "cut and paste" can change that.
The WP never said Hussein
claimed to possess WMDs. It said he
allowed the world to think he possessed them. That's not the same thing and the difference is significant.
I think you are having trouble with the concept that "keeping your mouth shut", is different from "opening your mouth."
If someone in your neighborhood starts a rumor that you have a big mean dog in your backyard and you keep your mouth shut and don't correct that misperception, that's not the same as actually having a big mean dog or claiming you have a big mean dog.
Also who is the "world"? Most of the world did not participate in the Iraq war crime. Before the invasion and shortly thereafter, a majority of the world denounced it.
The February 15, 2003 anti-war protest was a coordinated day of protests across the world against the imminent invasion of Iraq. Millions of people protested in approximately 800 cities around the world. According to BBC News, between six and ten million people took part in protests in up to sixty countries over the weekend of the 15th and 16th; other estimates range from eight million to thirty million.
Some of the largest protests took place in Europe.
The protest in Rome involved around 3 million people, and is listed in the 2004 Guinness Book of World Records as the largest anti-war rally in history....
February 15, 2003 anti-war protest - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
There has been significant opposition to the Iraq War across the world, both before and during the initial 2003 invasion of Iraq by the United States,the United Kingdom and smaller contingents from other nations, and throughout the subsequent occupation. People and groups opposing the war include the governments of many nations which did not take part in the invasion, and significant sections of the populace in those which did...
Opposition to the Iraq War - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
If you look at the position of UNSC members at the time they were divided, with 4 supporting the US position, 7 opposing and 4 unable to make a clear statement one way or the other:
United Nations Security Council and the Iraq War - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
The "world" is not just the US, the UK and a few other nations that supported the Iraq war crime. Canada did not support the invasion and refused to participate in it.
The leaders of coalition of the bribed and coerced manufactured so much misinformation and bold face lies about Iraq that after a while they began to believe their own lies. Currently many of these same countries are busy convincing themselves that Iran plans to acquire nuclear weapons now.
What is important and what counts is what Iraq officially declared and what UN weapon inspectors found.
Iraq's 12 CD-ROM, 43 spiral-bound volume, 11,807 page declaration of their military and civilian chemical, biological and nuclear capabilities submitted to the UN on December 7, 2002 was summarized by General Hussam Amin:
“We declared that Iraq is empty of weapons of mass destruction. I reiterate Iraq has no weapons of mass destruction"
If your beliefs are true, then you should be able to find a quote by an Iraqi leader claiming they possessed WMDs between December 7, 2002 and the March 20, 2003 invasion.
The organization tasked with assessing Iraq's WMD threat was UNMOVIC. Ultimately it was their findings which should have the guided the world's policies regarding Iraq. Like Bush you choose to ignore their report which basically finds that Iraq is not a WMD threat and that all remaining disarmament issues could be resolved within a few months.
You should read this report:
Security Council 7 March 2003
