Gavin Bell gives us a British perspective:
So, Bush has decided to go to war, Iraqis will die regardless of this decision, whether at Saddam Hussein's hands or by US and UK bombs. I just cannot see how this is meant to improve the world situation, how will this create peace in the world. I can see that this is not about Iraqi oil, as there is a small amount of it, that is available now, and it will cost a lot to double capacity. It is not about the honour of the UN, as they are being ignored, so is it about the desire of the last superpower to declare the world order in to two sides for simplicity and American commercial interests ?
Those of us happy to be in old europe can see that the world is more complex than that. George Bush must understand this too. Otherwise who is next, to militarily overthrow every regime the US disagrees with will result in countless wars on most continents in the world, not a prospect many will relish.
[Bell, Gavin "The Inevitable War", 17 Mar 2003, viewed 20 Mar 2003]
While I don't think things will get quite as extreme as that, that's the feeling and the worry that I've had for quite some time myself. A lot of people feel this way, and I really really think it will come back to haunt us. Just like our superpower actions and regime changes gave us this situation today. We (probably) could not have predicted in 1963 and 1968 that our actions would in very short order set up a dictator we'd have to come back and dethrone - but one hopes that we've learned from this history. As bad as war is, it's probably a good thing that we don't rely on the CIA so much anymore for leadership changes in the badlands.
Quaintly, Gavin Bell gave NetNewsWire 5 Stars in Macworld UK - the excellent program I'm using to post this entry. Kudos, Brent!