[nicky g]

"I suppose if the USA invades Iraq and topples the Iraq ruling regime then shows evidence of WMD a lot of you'll say that the USA is fabricating it."

I wouldn't be hugely surprised if they did. It wouldn't be too hard given that they could just take a fraction of their own stocks over with them. But really, I don't know whether or not Iraq has WMDs any more. Probably it has some. Certainly it used to have lots. I just don't think, along with others, that Iraq is a greater threat than many other regimes with WMDs, or a threat to the West in its current state, and I don't see the case for a war that will kill tens of thousands of people and may spark off global chaos. Specifically on this topic, I don't think the argument "we have to go to war or the UN looks weak" holds any water; the UN has looked weak for years, there are dozens of resolutions being violated all over the world, and the resolution 1441 doesn't call for war to enforce it. Surely having a second resolution calling for war imposed by the UK and the US would surely show even greater weakness in any case, given that the solution to other UN resolutions is virtually never war, except when the West has decided to start one regardless. Most of the people arguing that this is the time for the UN to show its usefulness have zero respect for it at all other times.