Ok- I have been debating Iraq, and I've moderated my views-again.

I have come to this conclusion: In principle, I would've supported intervention, but like all of Blair's policies, the plans were written on the back of a fag packet.

I believe that Blair should've addressed the Socialist International, with words to this effect:

"On September 11th, the United States was attacked. It was an attack felt by all in the western world though. It's unwarrented, unprovoked, and coldblooded nature, shocked us all. Iraq was the only nation to endorse these attacks. I cannot be sure that Saddam is developing WMD's. But no-one can doubt, that he wants them, and would use them if he had them. Even if he was found not to be developing weapons, an intervention would be a step forward for non-proliferation. This is an oppertunity to rid the world, of one of the greatest tyrannies, in modern history. The time has come, to ensure that in a world now aware that we are all under threat from religious extremism, that Saddam's tyranny comes to an end. UNICOM say that he would like to develop weapons. He's butchered Iranians, and Kurds with chemical weapons. He says his biggest mistake was not developing a nuclear bomb before he invaded Kuwait. He unleashed ecological catastrophes on Kuwait, and the worst in modern history, according to UNESCO upon the Marsh Arabs in Southern Iraq. This is an oppertunity, to allow the Iraqi people to build a democracy, based on the social-democratic values, of which we as socialists, adhere to. So we must support our Iraqi comrades such as Jalal Talabani or Kanan Makiya, to ensure that Iraqis get universal healthcare and public education, trade union rights and redistribution of wealth, tackling inequality and smashing poverty and unemployment. As for oil, we must ensure that no longer will oil companies exploit the oil fields of Messopotamia, off the backs of the despotism enforced upon Iraqis, in order to avoid starvation. We must ensure that the Iraqi people, have access to their oil supplies, free from the exploitation of western society. Let them rebuild their society, with their oil, so that Shias and Sunnis, Men and Women, Kurds and Arabs, can rebuild their society as an example of the wonders that humanity can acheive. Let freedom ring across Iraq, and the Middle East. Let us rid the world, of the butcherer of the Kurds, and the Marsh Arabas, the democrats and the traade unionists, the socialists and the dissidents. If we don't forget the plight and suffering of the Iraqi people, the Iraqi people, will not forget us."

This could've rallied left-wingers across the world to supporting intervention. It could've stuck a tone with those old enough to remember fighting fascism, in Spain, Greece, Portugal, Italy and Germany. Those who fought oppression in India and South Africa may also have responded similarly. Those countries bearing the brunt of the immigration from the oppressed Kurdistan: Austria, Sweden etc. may have heeded the call, to fight for the removal of Saddam, if they thought that the European social democrats and socialists could help the largest Arab Democratic socialist movement in the world. Liberals and moderates in places like Canada and the United States may also have fought for this cause, in larger numbers.

If Blair had conveyed his case like this, addressing the concerns and questions about the nature of the intervention, it could have been much simpler. perhaps with a larger international presence, Iraq would be a more peaceful country today. Maybe France, or even Russia could have supported the intervention (well, with change in leadership of the presidency).

But again, Blair had instead spun and spun and spun. It ensured that the post-war planning, like his case for war which was written on the back of a fag-packet, would be disasterous.

In principle, I would've supported it. But I believe that the left could've done better to ensure that Iraqis were not subjected to neo-liberalism, and the far more dangerous religious fanaticism in Iraq. There were no major left-wing groups saying 'Ok, Blair's case for war was fraudulant. But our main priority is ensuring that Iraqis can build a fair and equal society. We can criticise Blair and Bush, but we must help our Iraqi comrades, as much as we can.'

I think too many nihilist diatribes were uttered. I think we have failed to stop new forms of tyranny. I don't think we have caused it, but we've failed to stop it. It is now our main goal, to ensure that we can withdraw as safely as possible, while maintaining that the Iraqis can have as much of an egalitarian and peaceful society as possible.

Withdrawing from Afghanistan is simpler: legalisation of heroin.