The United States had no right to invade Iraq.

O ur good, this is gonna be fun "I. The United States had clear authority under international law to use force against Iraq under the past circumstances under UNSCR 1441" Didn't authorize use of force, but to conduct searches operated by UNMOVIC and the IAEA who had sole authority. United Nations Secretary-General Kofi Annan said "If Iraq's defiance continues, however, the Security Council must face its responsibilities", He said, "This is a time of trial -– for Iraq, for the United Nations and for the world. The goal is to ensure the peaceful disarmament of Iraq in compliance with Council resolutions and a better, more secure future for its people." Nothing in the resolution constrained any Member State from acting to defend itself against the threat posed by that country, or to enforce United Nations resolutions protecting world peace and security. Source: http://www.un.org... II. Reports about WMDs. Curveball: German intelligence detained an informant code-named curveball. The Germans didn't believe his claims but handed him over to the CIA anyway. Then the CIA after questioning him about mobile nuclear and bio weapons factories also thought he was only telling them what they wanted to hear. President Bush still presented Curveball's information to Congress without any corroboration and Colin Powel used Curveball as his sole source when presenting his case to the U.N. – including the security council mentioned above. Naji Sabri, Iraq's foreign minister: Both the French and the CIA questioned him about Saddam and his ability to acquire a nuclear bomb in "several months to a year" to which we responded that Saddam could not build it that fast. He also testified that Saddam buried a 500-ton cache of nerve gas and other weapons after the Iraq Iran war, which turned out to be inaccurate. Only small amounts of degraded canisters were found and he also made no mention of a connection between Osama and Saddam. U.K "Downing Street Memos" : To quote "Bush wanted to remove Saddam, through military action, justified by the conjunction of terrorism and WMD. But the intelligence and facts were being fixed around the policy." "It seemed clear that Bush had made up his mind to take military action, even if the timing was not yet decided. But the case was thin. Saddam was not threatening his neighbours, and his WMD capability was less than that of Libya, North Korea or Iran. We should work up a plan for an ultimatum to Saddam to allow back in the UN weapons inspectors. This would also help with the legal justification for the use of force." Italian Forgeries: In late 2001, Italian Intelligence received documents that show Saddam Hussein's government was attempting to purchase yellow cake uranium from the country of Niger. These documents were handed over to the CIA and to Great Britain. By early 2002 both CIA and the State Department discovered the documents were forgeries. Former Iraq Ambassador Joe Wilson was sent by senior officials in the US Government to look into the documents claims. Joe Wilson found no evidence that Saddam had attempted to purchase yellow cake uranium. After informing the Bush Administration of the fact that the documents were forgeries and Joe Wilson found no evidence of any sale of yellow cake uranium, the George Bush said in his state of the union address "the British government has learned that Saddam Hussein recently sought significant quantities of uranium from Africa". Joe Wilson wrote an op-ed in the NY Times entitled "What I didn't find in Niger" refuting the Presidents statements. Shortly there after his wife, Valerie Plame Wilson, had her covert identity of a CIA officer blown in a column by Robert Novak. Terrorism link: Bush repeatedly linked Saddam with Osama and Al Qaeda before and shortly after the war. Extensive reports and investigations by the CIA and the Pentagon found no link whatsoever. Bush later admitted "I've seen no evidence that Saddam Hussien was involved with the September 11th." But that was only after it was to late. Sources: CBS News: http://www.cbsnews.com... Associated Press: http://www.pr-inside.com... MSNBC: http://www.msnbc.msn.com... CNN: http://www.cnn.com... MSNBC: http://www.msnbc.msn.com... NY TIMES: http://www.nytimes.com... FOX News: http://www.foxnews.com... Times UK http://www.timesonline.co.uk... Washington Post: http://www.washingtonpost.com... Telegraph co.UK: http://www.telegraph.co.uk... NY Times: http://www.nytimes.com... CBS News: http://www.cbsnews.com... ABC News: http://blogs.abcnews.com... MSNBC: http://www.msnbc.msn.com... MSNBC http://www.msnbc.msn.com... Washington Post http://www.washingtonpost.com... So as shown any authorization given to the Bush administration was built on fabrications purposefully made to justify the Iraqi invasion. III. It is fashionable to sneer at the moral case for liberating an Iraqi people long brutalized by Saddam's rule, the moral and humanitarian purpose provided a compelling reason for a war to remove Saddam. If this is a justifiable excuse, then why haven't we done anything about the Congo, Darfur, Northern Ireland, many other Middle Eastern countries, China, or North Korea. Answer: Because there was no incentive. Lets just face the fact that we invaded Iraq for reasons other than humanitarian causes. Even if I were to accept such an argument, then any other nation would be perfectly justified to invade us between the use of torture by our own soldiers, denying Americans due process in Guantanamo Bay (were they are also tortured), or even overthrowing Maliki's government under Iraq's new "democracy" were many of Saddam's torture chambers and prisoners are still fully operational. Sources: http://www.forbes.com... Regional Stability: I won't say anything about this but just let my friend Dick Cheney instead. In this video he talks about how invading Iraq would be a "quagmire" and promote instability. http://www.youtube.com... Peace: This is domino theory in reverse, didn't work once won't work again. Question, how is sectarian violence down in Iraq when they're in the middle of a civil war? They made that number based on from non-U.S. backed militias victims. Wonder what would happen if they counted our militias were we pay Sunni's to kill Shiites, the number would increase. http://www.antiwar.com... Stat: Over 90% of sunnis say it is o.k. to attack U.S. soldiers.