[vannrox]

A view from the UK.

[RightWhale]

forces like al-Qa'ida which thrive on resentment of America will strengthen in the event of war

The more power they lose as the war goes badly for them, the more they will resent it.

[SunStar]

Oh, so now it's next Spring? Give me a break. How about Summer of 2006? Maybe by Saddam's 80th birthday? I am SICK of the incessant spin and speculation of the entire global media. President Bush hasn't announced jack.

[Brett66]

The challenge is to construct a political way forward that neutralises the hatred without compromising our security. Politics is the key, but it demands time and attention and no end of patience.

Oh yeah,let's beg Saddam and all of the Islamists not to be mean. That'll work. < /sarcasm >

[Aric2000]

In the spring?

Where has this guy been? The war has already started, they just haven't noticed yet.

A war to them is massive air strikes and troops on the ground. That will happen, when the time is right, but the war HAS started!!

[PhilDragoo]

This is a barren landscape of feckless handwringing and depressive speculation.

It arises from a culture which rewarded Irish terrorism and disarmed its own citizens; is surrendering its sovereignty to eurosocialism and the jungle lawlessness of unbridled immigration.

UK military fighters are second to none, and some of FR's most bracing posters.

The limpwristed doomsayers of the UK press, however, are insufferable.

Wot a bleat: America will brush aside our concerns and attack Saddam in the spring.

It wasn't Big Ben or 10 Downing or Windsor Castle that collapsed in an inferno of Jet-A taking the spirits of three thousand innocents.

[billhilly]

The world was better when Britain was great. It is now puny, with puny leadership, and now only its pensioners can dream of better times.

[Teacher317]

America will brush aside our concerns and attack Saddam in the spring

Why would we give two whits about "your concerns"?

• Are you an official in power in the UK?
• Was your nation attacked by operatives supported by Saddam Hussein?
• Were 3000 of your countrymen intentionally slaughtered as they went to work?
• Why would you be concerned for a man who gasses his own citizens?
• Why would you worry for people who danced in the f****** streets at the news of the worst terror attack in history?
• Why do you desperately want to wait until two MORE major American cities are mortally wounded before you will support action against Saddam?

Sit down, shut up, and let America save the damn world (again), you worthless git.

(LOL, did I use "git" correctly?)

[Hugin]

Mr Bush has been told he runs the risk of creating massive instability in a region already seething with resentment, and in some countries outright hatred, of the US.

They all hate us anyhow...
So let's drop the big one now,
Let's drop...the big one...now

[tonyinv]

The challenge is to construct a political way forward that neutralises the hatred without compromising our security. Politics is the key, but it demands time and attention and no end of patience.

While the Brits play politics, our people are dying and continue to be a target.

Its the same in Israel, everybody is talking about a political solution, while the Israeli people are dying on buses and in dance halls.

Political discourse only works with a civilized people who seek a political resolution. It'll never work with people who just want to see you dead.

[Argus]

the war will be launched early in the spring

D-Day for the liberation of Iraq is September 11, 2002.

[McGavin999]

Well, they all hate us anyway, even without a real reason. Why not give them a reason to hate us. It'll make us all feel better.

[hinckley buzzard]

Again, analysis by the barstool. What is this fascination about "the fighting in the cities?"

Does this child really think we will go
chasing snipers through the alleys of Baghdad, while leaving Saddam's CBR capabilities out
there for him to use?

Just ask yourself: why on earth would we do that? PTUI. Reporters whose strategic thinking was crafted on the latest Nintendo game.

[DentsRun]

So no surprise that the author of the article, Richard Perle, dismisses much of the opposition to the war as "the feckless moralising of 'peace' lobbies or the unsolicited advice of retired generals".

I don't know why Perle ridicules the unsolicited advice of retired generals. Presumably they know what they're talking about and because they're retired they can freely speak their minds without fear of retaliation. Perle doesn't have to listen to his retired generals. But only a very foolish (or arrogant) man would dismiss them out of hand.