Not to start an argument, but...
What evidence has been proven to be manufactured?
Also, what has Iraq started dismantling? About 25 missles? How can that be viewed as anything remotely approaching dismantling? Imagine if you were a goofy little country and a really big mean country with the world's best military had it's heart set on forcing you to disarm - would you drag your feet and dismantle about one ten thousandth of your weapons?
I'll agree that Iraq isn't dismantling because they're sure that we're coming over there to shoot them in the head, but I can't see how you can imply Saddam is trying to work with us.
In regards to your claim that the US is acting hypocritical, I agree, but only to some extent. The US set a bundle of sanctions and rules on Iraq after the last war (which was NOT a UN war), and it hasn't followed any of those rules either. The US goes through the UN, because the world wants the US to go through the UN. But, in reality, the US has never recognized the UN as having much authority, and, in light of recent events, I can't see that I blame them.
The US is not really going after Iraq because it's breaking UN resolutions, and they have never really claimed that that's they're real beef. The US is going after Iraq because 1) they don't like Saddam, 2) Saddam has WMDs, and 3) he is supporting terror organizations. That's what Bush has been pressing. He brings up the 14 broken UN resolutions when he's talking to the UN saying "look, we want to kill him and you should too because he's breaking all the rules."
I think that this whole episode in world events proves that the UN is a weak and ineffectual body. They make a resolution, the deadline comes, so they make a new resoultion. They warn that they'll use force, then the deadline comes, and they issue another warning. "Stop, or I'll say stop again."
Sure, the US doesn't really care about the UN, but can you blame them? What good is an international body that sets policy it has no plans of enforcing?