Madam, - The anti-war movement is now trying to suggest that weapons of mass destruction (WMD) were not an issue with respect to Iraq. To put some balance into the debate, let's see who, in addition to the US and UK, thought WMD were an issue.
Firstly, the UN Security Council did for 12 years.
Resolution 1441 passed last November (with the backing of France, China, Russia and others) recognised "the threat Iraq's non-compliance with Council resolutions and proliferation of WMD and long-range missiles poses to international peace and security".
Secondly, in 1998 at the request of Iraq, independent experts were asked to evaluate Iraq's declarations and information to the UN with respect to WMD.
These independent experts confirmed that Iraq's declaration was incomplete and inaccurate with respect to both chemical and biological weapons.
Thirdly, the International Institute for Strategic Studies, in its Iraq's WMD - A Net Assessment issued last September, said "It has extensive biological weapons capacities and a smaller chemical weapons stockpile, though delivery means for both are limited and uncertain".
Fourthly, Hans Blix repeatedly stated that Iraq was co-operating in terms of process but not in substance. He continued to list serious WMD issues - most predicted in the IISS Net Assessment document.
In his March report quoted in this newspaper, he said "I naturally feel sadness that three-and-a-half months of work carried out in Iraq have not brought the assurances needed about the absence of WMD"; and "Our experts have found so far that in substance only limited new information has been provided that would help to resolve remaining questions".
He then went on to list 12 major outstanding tasks including dealing with issues on chemical weapons such as VX, Sarin and mustard gas, and biological agents such as anthrax, botulinum and smallpox.
Finally, Saddam Hussein proved the issue - using WMD repeatedly in the Iran/Iraq war and subsequently; playing "games" with UN weapons inspectors for seven years - games many people will remember including complete denial, orders to impede, forgery and espionage, harassment, detention of inspectors in car parks for days, mob attacks and violent demonstrations, concealment, denial of site access, burning and dumping files in rivers, manhandling UN inspectors, firing warning shots etc.; and by not taking the opportunity under UN Resolution 1284 (1999) of complying with UN resolutions which would have led to the suspension of sanctions 120 days following Hans Blix's confirmation of same.
The real issues of locating and bringing to justice the genocidal maniac and his henchmen who caused the death of over 1.5 million people and huge pain, destruction and suffering is almost totally ignored as is the possibility of elements of WMD falling into terrorist hands.
As the international community gave this genocidal regime 12 years to meet its 1991 ceasefire terms on WMD, terrorism, and repression, is it too much to ask for one tenth of that time for the US and UK to deal with all these issues and to bring the key perpetrators of these crimes to justice? - Yours, etc.,
RICHARD F. WHELAN, Brighton Hall, Foxrock, Dublin 18.
Madam, - Were embedded reporters weapons of mass distraction? - Yours, etc.,
KEITH NOLAN, Caldra House, Caldragh, Carrick-on-Shannon, Co Leitrim.
Madam, - If the British Prime Minister, Tony Blair, is serious about restoring credibility in his firm assertion that the raison d'etre for the US-Anglo invasion of Iraq was to hunt out and destroy Saddam Hussein's weapons of mass destruction, he should support an immediate call for the UN inspectors, led by Hans Blix, to continue with the job that they were so perversely prevented from completing. - Yours, etc.,
MICHAEL CULLEN, Albert Park, Sandycove, Co Dublin.
Madam, - Commentators are stating that as WMD cannot be found, it must mean that they never existed. Because Sadam Hussein cannot be found, does this mean that he never existed? - Yours, etc.,
BARRY MCHUGH, Stoney Road, Dublin 14.