Is there any evidence that Iraq would supply terrorists if we didn't go to war?

Great Debates
41

I posted this in another thread, but it seems more appropriate here (so please pardon the double post).

“Other countries possess weapons of mass destruction and ballistic missiles. With Saddam, there is one big difference: He has used them. Not once, but repeatedly. Unleashing chemical weapons against Iranian troops during a decade-long war. Not only against soldiers, but against civilians, firing Scud missiles at the citizens of Israel, Saudi Arabia, Bahrain and Iran. And not only against a foreign enemy, but even against his own people, gassing Kurdish civilians in Northern Iraq. . . . I have no doubt today, that left unchecked, Saddam Hussein will use these terrible weapons again.” - Bill Clinton

42

He has only used them against opponents like the Kurds who couldn’t retaliate in kind. He conspicuously refrained from using them against either the Americans and the Israelis during the Gulf War no doubt out of fear of massive retaliation. That is a good indicator that he is unlikely to use them against the US unless invaded.

The argument that goes “he gassed his own people therefore he is likely to attack the US” simply doesn’t make any sense because it ignores the vastly greater retaliatory power of the US.