For Iraq. If there are not well-defined rules for proper inspections, then the US can claim there are all kinds of violations.

(The US, by the way, didn't sign the bio-chemical warfare conventions because they would have allowed foreigners to make sure the US wasn't building biological and chemical WMD.)

For instance, with "unlimited inspections", the UN could show up at night at a warehouse, demand entrance, and the US could claim they were denied access when no one with a key could be found at 1:00 AM.

The process needs to be negotiated so as to meet all legitimate needs, and Iraq has some here. Just saying "we demand unlimited inspections" ain't enough.

But it sounds good. For instance, "unconditional surrender". Sounds great, but costs lifes. Before Japan heard that, they would have surrendered, had they known they could keep their Emporer. "Unconditional surrender" sounds like they would lose him, and thousands of Americans died, not to mention Japanese.

And in Iraq, the US did use the former UN inspectors as spies. Saddam is right on that one.

Arf