Iraq War 2003: Weapons of Mass Destruction — Reading Comprehension

The 2003 Iraq War began after the United States and its allies accused Iraq of possessing weapons of mass destruction (WMDs). These weapons are chemical, biological, or nuclear arms capable of causing large-scale destruction and civilian loss. President George W. Bush and British Prime Minister Tony Blair argued that Iraq’s leader, Saddam Hussein, was hiding these dangerous weapons and might use them or give them to terrorists. Their claim became the main justification for launching a military invasion in March 2003.

The U.S. government presented several pieces of evidence to support its position. They cited intelligence reports, satellite images, and statements from Iraqi defectors. Secretary of State Colin Powell famously told the United Nations Security Council in February 2003, "We know that Saddam Hussein is determined to keep his weapons of mass destruction." This statement was meant to convince other countries that immediate action was necessary. However, some nations and many experts doubted the accuracy of this evidence and called for more inspections before using military force.

International perspectives on the war were sharply divided. The United States, the United Kingdom, and a few allies supported intervention, arguing it was the only way to prevent Iraq from threatening world security. In contrast, countries like France, Germany, and Russia urged caution. They believed the available evidence was inconclusive and advocated for continued United Nations weapons inspections. This disagreement shows how different countries interpreted the same intelligence in distinct ways, depending on their own interests and values.

Inside Iraq, the situation was also complex. Saddam Hussein denied having any WMDs and claimed the U.S. accusations were false. Many Iraqi citizens were fearful of war, having already suffered from years of sanctions and conflict. Some opposed Hussein’s rule, but others were suspicious of foreign intervention. The Iraqi government’s lack of transparency—its unwillingness to fully cooperate with inspectors—made the situation even more complicated and fueled suspicions in the West.

After the invasion, coalition forces quickly defeated the Iraqi military and removed Saddam Hussein from power. However, extensive searches by U.S. and United Nations teams found no active WMD programs. This discovery led to intense debate about the reliability of the intelligence and the motivations for war. Some critics accused U.S. leaders of exaggerating the threat, while supporters argued that Hussein’s history justified caution. The failure to find WMDs damaged the U.S. government’s credibility and led to distrust among some allies and citizens.

The consequences of the Iraq War were far-reaching. Iraq experienced years of violent conflict, political instability, and humanitarian crises. The absence of WMDs raised questions about how governments use intelligence and the responsibilities of global powers. It also highlighted the importance of questioning assumptions and demanding solid evidence before making critical decisions. The Iraq War remains a significant event for understanding the risks and complexities of international politics.

Interesting Fact: The Iraq Survey Group, which searched for WMDs after the invasion, found that Iraq had destroyed its banned weapons years before 2003.

When did the Iraq War begin?

Who was Iraq's leader in 2003?

Which country did not support the war?

Why did the U.S. invade Iraq?

What was a consequence of the war?

What did some countries want instead of war?

No active WMDs were found after 2003. True or False?

What does 'credibility' mean in the passage?