Pro to the question "Should the US Have Attacked Iraq?"
"Washington should pursue regime change. Containment is a failed policy, and inspections are unlikely to lead to Iraq's disarmament. Only regime change is likely to result in the discovery and destruction of Iraq's WMD. While this course of action entails numerous risks, the United States cannot afford to ignore Saddam's WMD threat; doing so would endanger the lives of many innocent Americans by paving the way for a bigger, more deadly event along the lines of the September 11 attacks."
"Iraq's WMD Declaration: How Important? How to Respond?" Address to the Washington Institute Special Policy Forum, Oct. 20, 2002
Experts Individuals with PhD's, JD's, or equivalent advanced degrees in fields relevant to the US - Iraq conflict. Also top-level government officials (such as foreign leaders, US presidents, Founding Fathers, Supreme Court Justices, members of legislative bodies, cabinet members, military leaders, etc.) with positions relevant to the US - Iraq conflict.
Involvement and Affiliations:
Senior Fellow, Potomac Institute for Policy Studies
Head of the Iraq Study Group, 2003-2004
Special Advisor for Strategy regarding Iraqi Weapons of Mass Destruction Programs, 2003-2004
Vice President, Science Applications International Corporation, 1993-2002
Chief Weapons Inspector, United Nations, 1991-1992
Deputy Director, Iraq Action Team, International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), 1991-1992
Head of the evaluation section of the department of technical cooperation for the IAEA, 1983-1991
Employed in the Pentagon (position not stated), 1983-1988
Former Secretary General, Uranium Institute, London
Former Board Member, Defense Science Board
Former Member, US State Department's Advisory Committee on International Organizations
Former Member, Rockefeller Foundation's Advisory Group on Conflicts in International Relations
Former Member, US Delegation to the U.N. General Assembly