Has time finally run out for Saddam?

The chief United Nations weapons inspectors have arrived in Baghdad for final meetings with Saddam Hussein before presenting their findings to the UN.

Dr Hans Blix told reporters that war can still be sidestepped if inspectors received "very active Iraqi co-operation" in their search for illegal weapons.

Following the discovery of empty chemical warheads in Iraq and a day of worldwide mass protests against a US-led war, the meeting comes after an extremely tense week.

Have the inspectors still got a role to play? Do you think Saddam will give "very active" co-operation at this point? Has time finally run out for Saddam?

This Talking Point is now closed. Read a selection of your comments below.

---

Does anybody remember the phrase appeasement? Clearly Tony Blair and Bush recognise a danger to the free world. North Korea is in the midst of nuclear blackmail. Do we need to let Iraq get to the point where they will do the same?
Allen King, USA

Nothing has changed. Bush will have his war in spite of every thing the weapons inspectors say or do. US arrogance is again evident with their possible granting of immunity and agreement of exile for the Iraqi hierarchy. Once again it shows the opinions of rest of the world does not matter one iota in the US scheme of things. Everything is decided in Washington folks.
Mike, Australia

The anti war protestors are forgetting one thing. Sometimes it takes a few hundred, or a few thousand innocent lives to be lost in order to protect the present and future millions of lives. Every life is precious, and it is sad when innocents suffer. But, unfortunately, war is a necessary evil at times.
Gloria Meyer, USA

Yes the inspectors have still got a major role to play. We should give them time to do their job professionally and let the UN decides whether we should go to war with Iraq, not Bush or Blair. Remember, Saddam is only one man and just to take him out we are going to jeopardize the lives of men women and children of a whole nation.
Robert A. Khin, Burma/Malaysia

Too much planning, too much money, too much personal reputation is now committed to the US invasion of Iraq to put a stop to it

James, Australia

Too much planning, too much money, to much personal reputation is now committed to the US invasion of Iraq to put a stop to it. It will go ahead regardless - but why care? Iraqis will be delivered from the evil regime that holds them prisoner in their homeland, that commits genocide, that gasses innocent civilians etc. Let's hope it happens sooner than later.
James, Australia

Those who favour war will argue that if nothing was found then it was just very well hidden. Those opposed to war will want to give Saddam the benefit of the doubt even if vast stockpiles of nuclear warheads are found. Ultimately it seems clear Bush and Blair are decided that a war must happen so who are we, the electorate, to change their minds?
John B, UK

I think that the UN and the Iraqi people are the only ones who should decide when Saddam has gone too far. At the moment the inspectors seem to be doing a great job which will eventually lead to Iraq disarming in a peaceful manner. It must be up to the Iraqi people to depose Saddam himself. Bush and his henchman Blair are just pushing the people to rally around him.
Philip, USA (Brit)

Saddam Hussein is a threat to world peace. He is the pillar behind which terrorists hide. I support Bush to subdue him before it is too late and bring democracy to Iraq. Bush must not continue to wait for the United Nations go-ahead
Philip Danjuma, Nigeria

As civil liberties continue to be lost in fear-fed push for war, there is a leader that frightens me much more than Saddam Hussein: my own president, George W. Bush. I pray that those who speak out against my country's imperialist intentions will find strength as our leaders push us towards a devastating war. When the war begins, I pray that we will turn our attention to the innocents in Iraq as well as the soldiers who will die, needlessly, in battle.
Justus Shenk, USA, Mozambique

Inspections without pro-active cooperation by Iraq is useless. It's pretty clear that is not going to happen. Instead of viewing the UN resolution as a "you must disarm", Saddam views it as a "you must allow in inspectors". That is why if we "just let inspectors work", we will be in the same situation 4-5 years down the road as today. Just when will be enough? It's the mindset that Saddam's regime has that has put it on a collision course with nations in the past 20 years. This is also why in 1998, the US senate voted unanimously for a policy of regime change. Without a change in mindset, there will always be a fundamental flaw in inspections which makes the goal unreachable.
Steve, USA

The UN inspectors have been sent to Iraq with the sole aim of establishing once and for all whether WMD's exist. Until they find conclusive evidence that they do, or until they are prevented from examining the evidence by Iraq, there can be no justification for war. If Bush thinks differently, he must seek a separate mandate from the UN.
S, UK

As a US veteran of Desert Storm, I am very keen to see us finish the job we left unfinished twelve years ago

Asher Abrams, USA

As a US veteran of Desert Storm, I am very keen to see us finish the job we left unfinished twelve years ago. Saddam is an evil man and he needs to go. As for the oil, I don't particularly care about Washington's motivations; I care about its actions. Also, I am disappointed that the BBC has chosen to focus on the antiwar segment of the military and ex-military population. Of course these people have the right to their views, and the BBC has the right to let them speak. But your coverage does not address the fact that most service members, present and former, believe in what we are doing.
Asher Abrams, USA

No, the US has no authority to invade a country simply because the inspectors found few empty gas tanks. This is an injustice. Why they are not doing anything about North Korea? Just because there is no oil. Again, the US has no authority to invade a country which is living in peace.
Mohamed Ashraf, India

Troops numbering, 200,000, troops, six carrier groups numbering 72 vessels, multiple air squadrons and a determined President. Of course war is inevitable. If I was a weapons inspector I'd be packing my bags.
Tom Rogan, UK

Let us give the inspectors enough time to find and destroy if there are weapons of mass destruction in Iraq. I personally believe that there are other dictators who pose far greater risk to the world than Saddam Hussein. Bush seems to overestimate the military power of America. He should remember that it is easy to start a war, but it is extremely difficult to stop it. PEACE is a blessed word, let us keep it.
A. M. Hared, Canada

Clearly Saddam has not changed since the last round of inspections ended in 1998. The latest "final declaration" is bogus, and he's opening up the inspections just enough to play for time, hoping that international resolve will fade as the American military build-up continues. Sadly, he may be correct. Let's hope he is not. It's high time for this criminal dictator to go either to The Hague or the grave.
Mike P, Los Angeles, CA

It does not matter what the inspectors say. For the Bush administration has it's heart set on war. Mr Hussein's time is up.
Mark, Scotland/ US

Those against the war will not be swayed by anything found by the inspectors. When something is found, they equivocate about its significance or use it as a reason to "let them continue their job". If a pile of nuclear bombs were to be found the antis would demand time to find more.
Bill Carter, USA

The war will go ahead, whether evidence is found or not. The 200,000 troops in the Gulf now, are there to remove Saddam. No way they would be withdrawn now, too much face to lose.
jack pault, Hong Kong, China