[Carry_Okie]

I'm not sure that question can be answered because we do not know for sure that the WMD would have been there (or to be honest are not still there) if we had gone in without legal cover.

We HAD legal cover: the UN resolution under which GWI was settled and others. We didn't need another. Second, we had UNSCOM's talley of the WMDs and no record that they were destroyed. Third, there is ample evidence from documents translated and posted here on FR that materials were moved to Syria and Russia.

All we got out of that UN butt covering was a severe pain in the a$$.

[pollyannaish]

You are right about technical legal cover. And you are right about materials (jveritas be praised). And you are right about the UN being a severe pain in ass.

The administration made a calculation that it would help them, then in hindsight its become clear they might as well have gone for it. But again, all of that is in hindsight and it's just too easy to identify where things went wrong. Out of curiosity (and you don't have to answer if you need to go) did you believe that way at the time? Or is your current position a response to that experience?