Now the thing to do is to see whether Bush sets about trying to extend any inspections in ways designed to try to stop Saddam agreeing to them.

An analogy which keeps coming to mind is the way the Great War started with some similar manoeuvres. To start with you had an atrocity, the assassination of the heir to the Austro-Hungarian Empire by a member of a group supported and dependent on the Serbian Government. Then you had a set of demands against Serbia aimed ostensibly at attacking its capacity to engage in terrorist attacks, but with the demands being ratcheted up with the intention of avoiding any settlement that didn't involve what nowadays would be called "change of regime", and did involve what was intended to be seen as national humiliation.

The basic thing to keep in mind is that no evidence whatsoever has been produced to suggest that Iraq had anything to do with September 11, or that there is any greater likelihood of that country unleashing a suicidal sneak attack than there was at the time that the USA was supporting Saddam, some time after his murderous attacks on his neighbours in Iran and his subjects in Halabja.

The only thing that has changed is that there are people in power in Washington who appear to be trying to exploit the terrible events of September 11th by using them to pry open a window of opportunity that will enable them to make a war. A war which will provide significant financial opportunities for the oil business. (And that last bit of cynicism is Doug's, but it makes sense.)

Well, maybe it is a bluff. These are dangerous games. They always used to say that one trouble about the cold war is that one side was playing chess, and the other was playing poker. What game do they play in Iraq's military circles?