Bliar?

I just don't know what to think about the Iraq war.  I read Christopher Hitchens on Iraq, and can't help but feel that getting rid of the torturing genocidal tyrant Saddam was a good thing.   There is no doubt that Saddam had used chemical weapons, both against Kurds and against Iranians during the Iraq/Iran war.

 I do wonder if the Americans hadn't seriously messed up how to deal with the Iraq after the initial victory, reactions might not be what they are now.

I know that international law exists, but I have this very uncomfortable feeling when people talk about the sovereignty of countries which aren't democracies.  It seems to be saying that the people in a country are nothing more than the possessions of a ruler.

On the other hand, it seemed like the weapons inspector Hans Blix could have completed his job given a few more months.

The question I would like answered is this - what was the urgency to remove Saddam?  Why would a delay of six months or a year to allow the UN weapons inspector to have done his best been a problem?  If there were still major questions at that point, then it may have been easier to get UN approval for action.

I'm afraid I don't go for simplistic views that the war was wrong, or that Blair was a liar.  Politics is messy and confusing.    I don't think we have anything like the full story yet.