Any credit for baulking US & UK "War Plans" should in all fairness go to Turkey, Syria, Jordan and Saudi Arabia, not France or Germany.

One thing I was pleased to hear in Dr. Hans Blix's report to the UNSC was his recognition of the instrumental role played by the current American Administration in getting the inspectors back into Iraq. And yes the inspectors will get the additional time they have said that they require - no point in letting them go back if you are not going to let them do their jobs.

LH is great at drawing parallels with Germany in the 1930's - the one he makes no reference to is the one where if either Britain, France or America had taken the same stance with Germany that the current American Administration has taken with Iraq - Hitler would have been stopped in his tracks in 1936.

From reading some of the posts above, it would appear that many believe that the Ba'ath Regime in Iraq are totally harmless and if left to their own devices all will be well. The potential for disaster posed by countries such as Iraq, Iran and North Korea does not stem from them attacking the USA, it stems from their willingness to support terrorist groups materially, technically and financially. Now, I suppose many would totally dismiss that as completely outwith the realms of possibility - in the light of the attacks of September 11th, the President of America cannot afford to take that chance, his primary responsibility in taking up office is to ensure the safety of the United States of America and it's people.

The countries described as the "Axis of Evil":

North Korea - Extremely poor due mainly to the paranoid, corrupt, totally inept, self-perpetuating regime in power. They have a track record of signing agreements that state they will do one thing, when in actual fact they fully intend doing the opposite. They will sell anything to anybody so long as it keeps the current rulers in power.

Iran - Formerly the driving force of Islamic fundamentalism and strongly anti-American. They have openly supported Islamic Terrorist groups operating in Palestine, Israel, Lebanon and Syria. Not so much in the forefront now due to massive internal demands for reform. This is mainly due to the fact that Iran is currently the only one of the three countries where dissent and political debate is possible

Iraq - Well documented track record of aggression against both internal ethnic groups and its neighbours. Well known reputation for completely ignoring treaties, agreements and accords. For years they quite openly pursued programmes to develop and acquire weapons of mass destruction. Like Iran they openly provide support for terrorist groups. The ruling Ba'ath Party in Iraq is probably the most brutally repressive regime in the area.


Various people post and tell the world and it's dog that any forthcoming conflict is all about oil, quoting Iraq oil reserves as the prize for the victor. Doesn't really add up, Iraq pre-1991 only accounted for one-seventeenth of the worlds oil production and it's absence from the world markets post Desert Storm has hardly been noticed. Afghanistan was about Caspian oil - I'd love to know how. Currently there are four major land pipeline projects in progress, three in Russia (The worlds largest producer of oil, with the greatest reserves) and one in Azerbijan and Turkey. America does not import all that much oil from the middle east, its main foreign supplier of oil is Venezuala. The three Rusian pipelines all have a common terminal point, Murmansk - the main export target is the USA. The Azeri-Turkish pipeline provides an alternative route for Azeri oil exports to their current single outlet through Russia and Georgia (this pipeline runs through Chechnya).

Threads on this, and associated topics, are riddled with theories regarding "Bushes" alterior motives and the machinations of big business - Have those same proponents of those theories examined possible motives for the stance being adopted by France and Russia, particularly with respect to possible regime change in Iraq?