> Personally I think it's all about George W making himself feel
better about not being able to bomb the hell out of OBL.
>
> As for Blair, it's just a case of mindless fundies of a feather
> sticking together.
>
> I am totally opposed to the war - but I think GWB will go it alone
if he doesn't pull the UN into line and Blair will slavishly follow.
>
> I think N Korea is far more of a problem than Saddam myself. And
> Mugabe. Leave Iraq alone long enough and someone will stick a knife
in
> Saddam's back without the trouble and expense of dropping bombs and
> killing all sorts of innocent people. Don't think the same is true
of
> the other two.

* I think you make a lot of good points. Clearly Dubya's inadequacy
plays a part in the current crisis, but another reason is that right-
wing elements in the US government want to establish a large military
presence in the Middle East. Presumably so they can keep other
countries in line, and control the huge oil reserves Iraq has.

Personally I don't think North Korea is a threat to anyone, except
perhaps North Koreans and Mugabe will be destroyed in some sort of
popular revolt. Saddam has learnt too much from his old CIA
controllers, I don't think he will be easy to get rid of. As for
blaming Blair for going along with Bush, can you *imagine* the
headlines if he hadn't? "The Sun Says Coward Blair for Letting Down
the USA". Daily Mail "Patriotic Conservatives Back Bush" and other
such rubbish. Not that the Conservatives deserve any credit - did
you see the news that in 1985 Mrs Thatcher's government sold Iraq
chemical plant to make weapons?

The only solution I can see is to encourage secular, democratic
governments around the world - if possible through trade and if not
then through aid. As I am fond of saying, democracy is the worst
system of government in the world - apart from all the others.

Martin