The current "proof" offered to the people of earth by Colin Powell are highly subjective (interpretation of satellite photos that we have to beleive came from Iraq) and recordings of phone conversations _presumably_ from high ranking officials in the Iraqi regime (for all we know it could be just actors). The rest of the proof is based on a fallacy : "We cannot find weapons of mass destructions, so they must have them".

Appart from the tape message from Bin Laden, there was no solid proof of an association between Al-Qaeda and the Iraqi government. For exemple, if I say I am associated with some person, doesn't actually mean that the other person accepts it (which happens everyday when one-way crushes between 2 people occur and the other rejects the advances).

It wouldn't be the first time that a country would use such manipulation to trigger an international conflict. A nice exemple is here: Clicky

Of course one must really think what is there to gain for the Unites States in gaining control of Irak. There has been no serious threat of attacks nor usage of these weapons. The only natural resource worth something in Irak is oil. Of course we must not forget that the USA finally got their oil & gas pipeline in Afghanistan BBC news (a project that was rejected by the taliban) and lamentably botched their attack on Al-Qaeda.

Of course there are concerns that Irak does have mass destruction weapon. Biological weapons were supplied to Irak by the United States. Chemical weapons by Germany and Nuclear weapons by france. Most of them were bought on credit (and never refunded of course) so that Irak could fight Iran. Of course there wasn't much of an official record of the quantity given (This information from a ZoneLibre show on radio-canada).

One must not forget that the current tax plan of Bush has a tax bailout for people that buy full SUVs (and not the fuel economic versions). Also one must note the lack of proactive action by the Bush administration to do anything good for the environment. All he does seems centered on fossil fuel consumption.

Currently I think that the amount of evidence suggests that the Unites States wants to annex replace the government of Irak so it can gain better control of petroleum resources in the country. Which is a really good timing since the prices have been rising due to the botched coup d'etat in Venezuela stopping most oil exports to the United States(incidently one of Venuzuela main clients). Washington Post article. Of course, helping the opposition gain control of Venezuela would really help the United States decide what it should do with the oil. Anyone besides me is seeing a thrend here ?

Let's not forget North Korea, which we _know_ that they have the capability to make nuclear weapon and admited that they have a nuclear program. What are the United States doing ? Not much. They are open to diplomacy. Of course they don't have much oil.

Just to add to the icing, here is the results of a search on Amnesty International website regarding the United States.
Amnesty International on the USA