Critics are 'sexing up' their arguments against the government's case for war

The critics choose to forget that the international community, including those countries that opposed the war, was unified in its view about Iraq's capabilities. UN Security Council Resolution 1441, which passed unanimously in November 2002, explicitly recognised "the threat Iraq's non-compliance with council resolutions and proliferation of weapons of mass destruction and long-range missiles poses to international peace and security".

Labor also said Iraq possessed WMDs. On September 17, 2002, Rudd told parliament that Saddam "has invaded his neighbours, in complete violation of international law, and he is in possession of weapons of mass destruction, which in the past he has used against his own people as well as his neighbours. None of these matters are the subject of dispute." So if Labor still wants to peddle the nonsense that the Government lied about WMDs, it must at least concede that it did too.

But, of course, if the international community knew early last year what it knows now about Saddam's WMD programs, there would have been less debate in the Security Council about the appropriate action. Kay's report shows that removing Saddam was the only way the international community could be assured that he would no longer threaten anyone with WMDs. Far from unstuck, the WMD case is proven.

Through their determined action, Australia and its coalition partners permanently removed the threat of Saddam's WMD capabilities and aspirations. This action is already providing a global security dividend in Iraq, in Libya, in Iran and in North Korea.

While our critics continue to disingenuously push accusations of dishonesty, they underestimate the intelligence of the public. Australians see through phony debates and appreciate the honest exposition of the reasons behind difficult decisions.