Should the U.S. attack Iraq? Few dispute that Iraqi leader Saddam Hussein is a ruthless dictator. But is it right for the U.S. to attack a sovereign nation?

• Author: Phillips, James
• Position: Opinion

YES There is no question that Iraq still possesses weapons of mass destruction. Intelligence from U.S. sources, friendly countries, Iraqi defectors, and United Nations inspectors all indicate that Iraq has chemical and biological weapons now, and is within months of having a nuclear weapon if it can acquire fissile material--the key ingredient in creating a nuclear bomb--through its own devices or on the black market.

So send the inspectors back in, some observers say. But inspectors likely won't find much. Saddam has had nearly five years since the last batch of inspectors left to improve his weapons program and find better ways to hide the evidence. Iraqis who have escaped say previous inspectors didn't come close to finding everything they should have--and there's no reason to assume the next group will fare any better.

Iraq must be disarmed, not merely inspected. Inspections focus on the symptoms of the problem: Iraq's illegal weapons. But the world must focus on the cause: Saddam's dangerous regime.

Saddam's own behavior has removed any doubts that he'll use his weapons if he has not disarmed and deposed. He's used poison gas against his own people and against Iranians in the Iran-Iraq war. He has invaded two of his neighbors, Iran and Kuwait. He's launched missiles against Saudi Arabia, Israel, and Bahrain. Moreover, he tried to assassinate former President Bush in Kuwait in 1993.

Nearly 20 United Nations resolutions direct Saddam to destroy all chemical, nuclear, and biological weapons and long-range missile systems, and to cease brutal treatment of his people. He remains in defiance of all these resolutions.

It's time he--and other would-be Saddams worldwide--see that the United States and the international community are serious about keeping the peace, and preventing rogue leaders with dangerous weapons from using them on other nations or selling them to those who would.

Saddam has proven he has no intention of disarming, so the only realistic means of removing the weapons from Iraq is to remove Saddam and his outlaw regime.

--JAMES PHILLIPS Research Fellow The Heritage Foundation

NO There is no question that Saddam Hussein's regime is a particularly nasty one. It has launched wars against its neighbors, used poison gas, and abused its own population. These are reasons to be vigilant in dealing with Iraq, but they are not compelling reasons to go to war.

War should be a last resort. The U.S. should...