If it's true that most Iraqis think things are better than they were before the invasion, that's one good thing anyway, obviously. But I note that, even so, there isn't a majority in favour of the invasion.

The real question, and we'll newver know the asnswer to this, is whether if it had been handled differently that kind of outcome could have been achieved without all the bloodshed. After all, the invasion and the overthrow of Saddam haven't been the only things that have changed there has also been an end to the sanctions.

I suspect that that might have been one reason why some Iraqis who think the invasion was a mistake apparently think that things have got better.


(Aren't Iraquis Native Americans?)

..................

I'd suggest that Teribus (and everyone else, on either side of the argument) who feels like snapping out a comment like the one addressed to Amos in that last post, buttons his lip, goes off and has a cuppa, and comes back and writes something that helps keep the discussion on an even keel. "Never say anything here you wouldn't say face to face" is a good principle.