I think perhaps that the biggest difference between a mature, civilised adult and a child or emotional incompetent is the following. The ability to put oneself in the position of the other. To see the other persons point of view. And to do this neutrally, and dispassionately, however warped or wrong or wicked that other might seem. And to recognise that doing this in no way implies any defense of, or collusion with, that other.

This dispassionate skill is said to have been an essential tool in the hands of all the truly great military commanders of the past.

Look at this whole thing from Saddam Husseins point of view.

He gained power in a country which was created by the arrogant British with a stroke of the pen, just to meet their needs in controlling oil. Stupid borders, ignoring ethnic and religious boundaries. Kurds in the north, two different sorts of muslims areas in middle and south. He holds it together by force.
Over long years he gets support and encouragement and arms from the US and western europe.
Probably his worst atrocity is against a separatist movement by the Kurds. But did you know that the territory they wanted to take included Iraq's richest operating oilfields and the majority of its discovered wealth at the time? If he had lost that struggle they would have walked away one of the richest little states in the world, leaving behind an Iraq desperately impoverished (at least for a while).
OK, he is an apalling thug, and used corresponding methods, but you can see he had to do something. And the bulk og the population would have agreed with that.

Now, does he need any nasty weapons? Why do you think there is all this fuss about missile range? So he can't reach his deadly enemy Israel. But Israel has missiles with hugely greater range (some say 1800km, not 150) and has over 200 nuclear warheads, and is receiving probably $10 billion this year, mostly in weapons. There is good reason to believe Israel has highly developed chemical weapons, and probably biological.

Should he feel afraid? Would you ?

What earthly reason is there for his enemy to escape criticism and inspection and control?

It can't be that his bad behaviour shows he can't be trusted. Israel is embarked right now on a racist agenda of intimidation and oppression and murder coming close to genocide, right in front of the eyes of the world.

Is it any wonder Iraq is trying to hold on to its puny weapons? Wouldn't you?

And now. The US is towering over Iraq, with its mighty fist raised to strike. Looking for the tiniest pretext, lets be honest.

And now at last, that pretext is found. They've found a demand he can't possibly go along with.
Just about the only weapons that could maybe hurt the US with have been found to go just a teensy bit further than is allowed. (ie just a little bit close to Israel).

So what does he have to do? Throw them away. Render himself absolutely defenceless. When we all know he is going to be attacked anyway. If it isn't that pretext, it'll be another. Or none.

Remember we are pretending to be him. He probably has managed to kid himself he is acting to defend the Iraqi people (or at least his tribal group). Being surrounded by yes men doesn't help, even if you've used murder and tyranny to put them there.

I think this is a demand too far. "Throw away your weapons or I'll hit you, and I might do it anyway". I don't think so.

I don't think SH thinks he's evil. (who does?). I think he sees himself as forced to use violence and repression to hold together an almost impossibly split country. As needing to build and conceal nasty weapons in order to stand up to (and, yes, attack and dominate if he could) his neighbours and in particular one aggressive and dangerous neighbour made hugely powerful by its big friend, unbalancing the whole region.

So what do I conclude from this rather distasteful exercise? He cant give up his missiles at this point.

If you still feel there is a chance of avoiding war, you should not ask him to do so. Place these missiles instead under the immobilising guard of a decent UN force until the US threat is withdrawn and some equilibrium restored. Give the UN instructions that the moment the US attacks Iraq, they are to release these weapons from control, and withdraw, so that Iraq can use them in self defence.

Personally I no longer feel there is any chance of avoiding war, if only because the US would lose so much face in piulling back all those men and equipment.

So as far as I am concerned we should stop the pretence and let them get on with it, samoud missiles and all.

I think the most important thing now is to get the US (through the UN or not) to make a clear threat to Israel that it must not ethnically cleanse palestine in the confusion. I fear that is what they are planning to do. And preferably a pledge to create a free palestine and bring Israeli weapons under inspection and control next.

Despite all this, don't get me wrong. It is perfectly possible (I can't know) that attacking Iraq is the right thing to do. But I am certain that if any claim to moral behaviour is to be made, then Israel/Palestine (the true running sore) should have been sorted out first.