Saddam has demonstrated his own ethics many times in the past, including chemical warfare on his own citizens. Assuming when we are discussing ethics here, that we are specifically referring to the "innocent until proven guilty" statement, how much guilt do we need to prove? Is it necessary that we wait for him to bomb us before we take some kind of action?

It's interesting that many of the people who demand proof of harm before action is taken with other nations are the same people who would make it illegal for an American citizen to own a gun on the off chance he may shoot an innocent person with it. Where's the paranoia when you really need it?