Re: If your not on the list, you're not getting in
"The UN Security Council didn't authorise the attack in 2003. They only legitimised the occupation afterwards."
That's what I pointed out in my little play, US attacked unilaterally.
You are completely right about all the details, Iraq was certainly trying to hide something and the UN found the non-compliance with 1991 sanctions as a legal fig-leaf post-facto. Bottom line though is that US justification of attacking Iraq (that US had proof hat Iraq had WMDs) was patently false. Not to mention there was no sense in doing so either militarily (Iraq was not a real threat to US or it's allies) or strategically (addam was a monster but removing him just unleashed an even larger clusterfuck). The only justification was local (ie US) politics - to be seen to be doing something about 9/11 while not wanting to go knocking on the Saudi's doors asking about their support for Wahhabi terrorism