So tell me, where am I wrong in pointing out this particular piece of Iraq irrationality? Last night I was reading a Time magazine story about Rumsfeld's war plans. Reportedly he plans to emphasize the use of special forces troops, who are to swoop in at the beginning of the war and prevent Hussein from using his chemical, biological, and/or nuclear weapons. Now, one has to assume that this means the special forces will (1) be able to find out where the weapons are stored, and (2) be able to destroy them after they find them.
But...isn't this just what the U.N. weapons inspectors are supposed to be doing? And hasn't the U.N. been begging the United States for intelligence about where Iraq is hiding its weapons of mass destruction? If the U.S. special forces know where to go to destroy these weapons, why can't we tell the inspectors where they are, so we can be sure they are destroyed before they are used, and not after? Logically, it seems that if Hussein really does have weapons of mass destruction, we either don't know where they are (which means lots of people may be killed by them in an Iraq war), or we don't want to tell the inspectors where they are, because Bush wants a war more than he wants Iraq disarmed (think: oil).