"Saddam Hussein has openly admitted to the rest of the world that he had weapons of mass destruction. He used those weapons to kill his own people"

Saxby Chambliss’s statement addresses the widely debated topic of weapons of mass destruction (WMD) and their use in Iraq under Saddam Hussein’s regime. Chambliss asserts that Saddam Hussein publicly acknowledged the possession of WMDs, a focal point in justifications made for the 2003 invasion of Iraq. This declaration draws upon the international controversy surrounding both Iraq’s alleged and actual stockpiles of chemical and potentially biological and nuclear weapons. The global community had long suspected Hussein’s government of developing and using such weapons, reinforced by Iraq’s documented use of chemical agents during the Iran-Iraq War in the 1980s and the infamous 1988 attack on the Kurdish town of Halabja. That assault killed thousands of civilians, which stands as one of the starkest examples of a regime employing chemical warfare against its own population.

Chambliss’s remarks connect Hussein’s supposed admissions and acknowledged actions to the need for international intervention. By emphasizing Hussein’s reported openness regarding WMDs, the statement seeks to validate subsequent policy decisions, particularly those related to security and military involvement in Iraq, arguing that action was taken not on a presumption but on Hussein’s own words and history. This argument was frequently used by supporters of the Iraq war to counter skepticism about the existence of WMDs and the justification for armed intervention.

Moreover, the allusion to Saddam “kill[ing] his own people” serves to highlight the cruelty and criminality of his regime, rallying moral and humanitarian support for intervention. It paints Hussein not merely as a threat to international stability but as a leader who violated the most basic norms of human decency. This characterization influences public perception by personalizing the suffering caused, appealing to a sense of justice and responsibility, and situating the discussion of WMDs within the context of tangible and tragic human consequence.