This will probably be
our final postcard. Savour it. Love it. Admire it.
It comes from Dianne Barton who says: "Hi Eddie - thought you might like this - I've left it blank for you to put your own cross".
Jump to more content from this blog
About this blog
PM The evening news and current affairs programme presented by Eddie Mair.
iPM The programme that starts with its listeners. Join the discussions online and contribute ideas for a weekly programme presented by Eddie Mair and Jennifer Tracey.
The PM Privacy Commission
Read the final report of the PM Privacy Commission.
- Full Audio and Transcripts
- Hugh Tomlinson QC
- Zac Goldsmith MP
- Max Mosley
- Stephen Abell
- Hugh Grant
- Sir Charles Gray
- Alan Rusbridger
- Helen Wood
- Max Clifford
- Marcus Partington
- John Kampfner
- Christopher Graham
- Louise Mensch
- Andy Trotter
- John Mullin
- Avril Sanders Royle
- Jimmy Wales
Meet the commissioners, view the terms of reference and hear the Commission Chair Sir Michael Lyons explain his approach.
RSS feed
Email us
Listen to PM
And what a lovely postcard to finish on - arty and news-worthy! Rather like PM itself.
Any particular reason why there should be weapons of mass destruction on the moon?
I must be missing something.
Is that a smoking gun in the foreground?
Such sarcasm is all very well, but you can clearly see the stockpiles of nerve gas just behind the first dune on the left.
Funny old world, isn't it? If I went out into the street today with my hand in my pocket "gangster style", took someone "hostage" and threatened to "shoot" them with my pocketed gun (aka hand) and if the person I took "hostage" was small and weak enough for me to maintain this charade for some considerable period, it's quite possible I would get shot. Who said charades was just a harmless party game?
It's a film, 3 words, first word sounds like...
Nice thought provoking picture. Perhaps they should put Saddam Hussein back in the hole.
Johnnie (1) - I think it is Scottish - that's why there aren't any WMDs.
Aperitif (5)?
If you visit Faslane? You'll find lots of WMDs there.
Aperitif (5): Well frankly, it could be anywhere and there wouldn't be any WMD.
Eeeek! Half the beach has disappeared.....
But Joe thinks it's the moon Appie ?
Eddie -- anymore clues for us today, we all kinow who's got all the cameras and indeed some of the models -- so where and when do we start shooting them.
PS: Was I the only one who didn't get yesterdays Newsletter ?
is it Scotland? is it the moon?is it the desert?
no it's PM's usless scanner, obviously the toner thingy has gone.
but as Belinda says, unless it's America chances are there are no WMDs.
Anywhere Belinda? Well, not here, or the USA...
On a serious point, we all joke about how wrong the government was about WMDs now, but it is worth remembering that:
a) Sadam Hussein claimed to possess them;
b) Most of the world believed him.
I'm not suggesting that we/the US were right to act upon those beliefs - of course I'm not - but, in terms of beliefs, it is easy to be wise after the event.
Picture: It's the Dayone Beach sand dunes.
Aperitif (7)- What would you call deep fried Mars Bars, or deep-fried meat pies, if not Weapons of mass Destruction? Certainly hasn't done those Scottish hearts any good.
HELP!
what has happened to the new beach. I just tried to visit it to see how the plans for the froggers reading group were coming along and it stops at message 242, which appositely is Robbie's threat to leave due to the technical problems. Anyone esle got problems accessing the complete beach?
Plus, what a beautifully ambiguous strapline today.Full marks to Amanda.
13 Aperitif
Here comes the WOLF!
I can't see the beach either beyond 242.
Thought perhaps I could recover it for copying by hitting the back button, but no - refresh and it's evaporated.
admin annie (14)
Yep, the beach has been decimated! Lissa, are you there? Please help.
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA
Eddie will have to make another new beach!
Welcome to the third new beach :-()
HELP again
I'm with admin annie - can we get that embarassing blockage on the new beach removed (14th Novemeber) - please ?
And it looks like someone locked the gate to the beach as the calendar has disappeared along with the ability to add comments - I hope this means someone is in the process of recovering it?
We were still more than 100 entries away from the max of 600 Lissa had suggested.
ARGH! You're right, two thirds of the beach has been washed away.
It's apparently been consigned to the same fate as Day One -- I notice there's no longer a Comments facility there.
Now THAT. Is. Annoying.
What & where is the beach, I arrived late but like the idea of a book club, and the seaside!
Appy (13)
Continuing the serious note, I'm not sure that when the Weapons Inspectors were in Iraq and trying to do their job that Saddam was still claiming to have WMDs.
I concur with your comments about being wise after the event. I just wish that we could have been wise before the event. Why the Inspectors weren’t allowed to continue is beyond me.
Maybe war has broken out and the authorities have put rolls of barbed-wire up on the beach?
Lissa is "beach aware" and is working on it. Stand by!
As it looks like the tide is coming in on New Beach should we make this Beach 3?
...and no-one took a record of this beach....
Clearly the coastal erosion is greater here now the breakwater of wine bottles was removed by the likes of Ivor Gripe.
As for the pic, isn't that one from the probe that landed on Saturn's moon Titan (with all the funny colours etc).
I’m always wise after the event.
I’ll probably be wise enough, after posting the following, to know that I shouldn’t have bothered (people here):
Surely it is WsMD, not WMDs....
I've not had time to read every message so someone's probably already suggested this, but does it mean that we will have to send in photos of what we are looking at (?doing) at 16.59+ 1minute = 5pm every weekday?
Aperitif: If you were going to send a postcard of the West's WMD, then wouldn't it just be a posed photo of Bush'n'Blair? They've caused much more destruction than any suicide bomber could.
As for the 'after the fact', well yes, that is why it is called hindsight. The idea being that we learn from the mistakes and not repeat the errors. Until humans learn to actually do that though, hindsight is merely a hypothetical concept. It's not like the Iraq war or the reasons forthwith was the first time a country had gone into conflict - the 'after the fact' mentality is all over the place, mostly in history books.
Yipes - you are right! Half the new beach has gone and along with it all the book club! and no possibility of adding comments.
Whoever in the Beeb has these WMD please remove them forthwith from our beach and give us our sand back.
At least on the Dayone beach it was the earlier comments which vanished - this time it's all the later ones which have gone.
I think it's one of Christine's Paintings!
xx
ed
P.S. S.H. had long since ceased to claim WMD by the time the UN inspectors were withdrawn (against their will) to make way for pre-emptive war.
(I currently have new beach with 423 entries and will save to desktop as a precaution)
Wallpaper of Many Designs?
After the event,
We are not any wiser:
Just better informed
Edward, what's in the show today? She says in a pleading tone...
Ed - your link has failed.
to be honest I can't remember whether or not I believed saddam had WsMD or WMDs, but I certainly didn't believe that he could be ready to nuke London or anywhere else within 15 minutes, or 45 or whatever it was. My cynicism certainly set in fairly early. Wasn't there a 'rogue' weapons inspector who kept saying that there weren't any but no-one would listen to him. Well no-one in government anyway.
Doc,
I'm
xx
ed
U.S. Building World's Largest Embassy in Baghdad's Green Zone
With world's largest rooftop helicopter landing pad.
You can relax again folks (I hope!) The new beach has returned in all its' glory. I think it was just an invasion of hermit crabs that took over for a brief period....
re the serious comments, I tend to be of the same frame of mind that Ed and RobbieDo. Yes, Saddam had claimed in the past to have been pursuing WMD capabilities. However, by the time of the run up to the invasion, he had given up such a claim, and his government had produced the report requested by the inspectors. The inspectors had not finished their work when they were withdrawn. To a large number of people (remember the march through London) it was clear that further investigation was needed before an invasion should take place. However, their requests for a delay were ignored.
btw, it's not exactly easy to absolutely prove a negative 1005, as was requested of Iraq by the US, the UK, and others...
gossipmrs - that's what I've been thinking...
Excellent pc, Eric, and thank you, Dianne, it has been shown to the fellow denizens of this overheated room.
But - perhaps the beach should have been left alone. It may be sulking.
Meanwhile, everyone send good wishes to the long-suffering and still delightful Lissa
The beach is back!
Eddie/Lissa,
If the techies can improve the time between posting and appearing you'd have fewer repetitious entries clogging up the ether.
By the time this appears I expect several others to have said much the same, thus illustrating the point.
Thanks for all your help.
AA (39),
Scott Ritter, I believe, was the one whose accuracy, in retrospect, was very impressive with regard to WMD, etc. There were plenty of us, myself included, who were "wise before the fact," an observation which has brought me much anxiety since we seem to be led by not the brightest kids on the block.
Clever at self-promotion they may be, but intelligent, definitely not very, and you would expect them to have cleverer advisors as well. Clever at self-enrichment seems to be the order of the day, and hoping for membership in the ex-presidents' club (Carlyle Group), which also accepts ex-prime ministers...
Yours in ,
ed
A man said to the universe;
"Sir, I exist!"
"However," replied the universe,
"The fact has not created in me
a sense of obligation."
-- Stephen Crane, 1899
RobbieDo (25), yes, with you absolutely. Saddam had indeed stopped making claims to possess WsMD (OK Doc?) by time the weapons inspectors went in. Extrapolating from that, should we just have taken his word? The government would've been slated had they said "Oh, he says he hasn't got them after all - that's OK then", so inspection was certainly the right thing to do, and, as I said in my original post (13) I certainly am not advocating invasion.
Belinda (32), You are quite right about the definition of hindsight and, indeed, what use it might best be put to. However, I'm not sure whether you were making a point about something I said, and, if you were, what that point may have been. I don't think we disagree, put it that way.
Little Boy (17), Who are you suggesting was crying wolf? Saddam? (I refer to my third and fourth sentences in this post.) Bush? Otherwise, I don't know what you're trying to imply.
Fearless and Ed, I take your point - many people were wise before the event (although not party to the "information" that governments had, so "guessed correctly" rather than actually "knew" the truth in most cases). I ought to have made myself clearer - I will rephrase:
b) Most of the goverrnments of the (UN-affiliated) world claimed to believe him.
I'm far from happy with what's going on in Iraq - and many other places - but "I told you so" and "I wouldn't start from here" may be honest but are not helpful, that's all I meant. I do hope no one was attempting to suggest that I was frogging in favour of the present situation - that would be a deliberate misinterpretation: I think I was pretty clear about my meaning.
A, x.
Fellow froggers,
A propos of nothing in particular, I have temporarily archived a bit for anyone who thinks haven't got any sense of humour.
He's one of my weekly must-reads
xx
ed
On the matter of fore and hind, the story of Pandora comes to mind. Prometheus' name means foresight, and he warned his brother Epimetheus (guess) not to accept any gifts from Zeus, but to send them right back, 'cause he was sure evil (for men) would come of it. Epi found the gift 'knee-weakeningly' irresistible, (thinks,"Maybe I'll send it back in the morning...") and thus we got women.....
(opinions expressed are not those of the editor....)
xx
ed
Appy
I don't think you needed to rephrase. Your original b) comment seemed fine to me.
If not "believed him" then certainly "didn't disbelieve him".
The more I enter into this blog the more I realise that I should read every contribution twice before commenting or replying.
Aperitif: I wasn't aware I was making a point. I am pointless.
Book Club, what's all this about? Busy, busy day and I've just logged on here. Sounds interesting. Won't get onto Beach till this evening, so I hope it's still there then ;o)
Is that Hans Blix stood just out of shot begging to be given a short while longer to confirm his suspicions that there are no WMDs?
Or is it Robin Cook? It's tricky in this light.
People, you're still not telling me where the beach is, am I not allowed? Beginning to feel like being the last one picked for rounders at school & am sure you shall take pity on that!
Sparkly Helen,
Welcome to the new beach.
The old one is here, beginning around comment 244.
xx
ed
Helensparkles! Sorry about that. You are of course more than welcome to join us at /blogs/pm/2006/11/welcome_to_the_new_beach.shtml for barbeques, malt whisky (and indeed whiskey on occasion) and all other sorts of fun too numerous to list here...
HelenS (52):
For the current edition of the beach go to;
/blogs/pm/2006/11/welcome_to_the_new_beach.shtml
Dip your toes in the water, feel the sand under your feet, relax on one of the sun-loungers, have a drink (the bar is very well stocked) and help your self to something hot from the barby.
Don't mind the camels, they're friendly. And the people walking dogs have made sure that they are well-trained, so no need to watch where you put your feet.
Si.
Helen
Follow this - you can be on my side!
/blogs/pm/2006/11/welcome_to_the_new_beach.shtml
Helen,
I should have mentioned it's quite a long trek to the original beach, and that it now begins at comment 158. If you're not on Broadband, don't bother, as the software seems to increase journey time exponentially...
Have a drop of Lagavulin while you wait
Slainte
ed
RobbieDo, thanks - your "didn't disbelieve" was probably the best way of putting it yet.
Belinda, I am quite sure you are not pointless - I just wanted to make sure that there wasn't a specific point that I was missing.
Cheers all.
HelenSparkles you have to come to the beach. I meant to mention it the other day when we were having a really good conversation. I've been a bit distracted lately so wasn't thinking.
Not much serious stuff on the beach but we all touch base, let our hair down and get all warm and fuzzy over a drink or two and some fine cooking!
See you on the beach. Others' have posted a link.
Mary
RobbieDo (48) I agree about re-reading what you've (ie I've!) written before posting - it all seems very logical when it's in my head then I read what I've (by now, irreversibly) posted and it all seems very unclear and capable of being interpreted in about 5 different ways!
Frances O (42) even if we're right they're not going to tell us! Or was it on the porgramme tonight? I usually only get to listen on wednesdays & don't have time to 'Listen again' tonight
Having finally read the newsletter I realise I am behind the times (as usual)
Belinda - if, as you say, you are pointless, this must mean you have a very rounded personality:-)
Oh hey, no, annasee (15) -- deep-fried Mars Bars and meat pies are weapons of mass CREATION, not WsMD.
And Joe, (3), there are lots of reasons why there SHOULDN'T be WsMD on the moon, and I do hope they make a lot of sense to everyone and not just me. I'd be in favour of deep-fried Mars Bars on the moon, on the other hand. Can one do deep-frying in a vacuum? It might keep everyone who didn't agree about keeping WsMD off the moon busy trying to deep-fry Mars Bars there.
Ed (49 et al) Nice to see you concientously pointing us to your sobering and enlightening web finds again. Is it my imagination or did you disappear for a while?
I'm in complete agreement with you over the WMD hindsight issue. It was obvious at the very beginning if one listened to what thinking people were saying. The power of oil fields should have been obvious to all. Plus, of course the little boy's desire to show daddy how to do it right.
Throw out your televisions, don't buy daily newspapers, listen to the radio, then the lies become more obvious. The pictures are there to distract and deceive.
Sorry to be so serious I think maybe should leave now.....
Thanks Steve,
I was only away for a couple of days (well 3 actually) and it took a couple of hours to catch up (even skimming). As to foresight, how about this?
Halal Salaaaami
ed
Oh you are all as lovely as I thought you were, & now I am really excited about the beach, but it is bedtime now! Thank you for all the links & I'm glad you enjoyed our conversation as much as I did marymary.
Wot, no more postcards? There'll be no more next!
Hello Aperitif,
I really am pointless, as anyone who knows me will attest to, but thank you for the comments.
I think the vague concept I was struggling to bring out into the open above was in reply to the comment saying that (paraphrasing) "it is all well and good to have the benefit of hindsight, but when you go into wars you only have foresight and make judgements on the information that you have."
I think I was trying to say that the Iraq war/conflict/police action has hardly been a unique situation, and if the leaders wanted the benefit of hindsight before they got into this mess, they could have just read any history book*.
Every generation repeats the same mistakes as the previous one and this opinion is starkly illustrated by the constant optimism that leading a nation into war will actually be easy and lead almost immediately to victory, rather than a bogged-down situation where thousands of innocents die. There has never been an easy war and there has never been a war where a victor has walked away unscathed.
*But maybe they should join the PM book club to do that.
I'm with Belinda.
xx
Epimetheus
Belinda - you are anything but pointless. But I daresay this post will be - we seem to be suffering from arthritic ether this morning.
Re topic - if we can see that (what you so concisely articulated) then our leaders must also be able to see it, yet they persist. Is there some other imperative about which we know nothing? Could it be power distorting perception? Or the application of Political values, normally based around the misconception that as leader of a nation one can act knowing that ones beliefs are right. For we are talking about belief, not information that has been rationally assessed.
In that case this Iraqi conflict is still unjustifiable. Sadam was nasty, but just look at all the other repressive regimes with whom we not only do not go to war, but continue to trade.
Somebody sais it before me here, and prolly better - oil. I think that was the imperative.
On pre-emptive war and 'inside' knowledge:
"Allow the President to invade a neighboring nation, whenever he shall deem it necessary to repel an invasion . . . and you allow him to make war at pleasure. . . . If to-day, he should choose to say he thinks it necessary to invade Canada, to prevent the British from invading us, how could you stop him? You may say to him, 'I see no probability of the British invading us'but he will say to you 'be silent; I see it, if you don't.'"
Abraham Lincoln, Feb. 15, 1848
It's hard to have an original thought, ain't it?
xx
ed
Ok how about this for a pointless observation?
It was annoying me as it didn't look right but I've only just cottoned on.
WMDs is correct. WsMD is wrong.
Given that WMD is now an accepted abbreviation then the plural is WMDs.
We don's say MsP when we mean MPs
We don't say MsBE when we mean MBEs
A number of graduates become BAs not BsA
Told you it was pointles but I feel better now.
And one final bit of data on how effective we might expect to be in solving the world's problems with our methods, a poll from :
Can Europe create peace in the Middle East?
A. Yes
B. No
C. Don't know
Number of Pollers: 30421
Close Date: 25/11/2006
A. 29.3%
B. 55.8%
C. 14.9%
Shanthi
ed
I am an Iranian and in opposition with mullahs. Please just call me Mr Opinionated as I have an opinion on everything and my family in Iran will be in trouble if my name is known.
We Iranians say better to have a clever enemy than stupid friend.
It goes like this. A Shepard befriended a bear (stupid animal in Iranian folk law). Once the Sheppard killed a snake (intelligent in Iranian folk law). The snake's mate decided on revenge. When the Shepard was sleep and the snake got close enough to bite him but thought, the Shepard may not die instantly and may kill me before his death. At the same time the bear saw a persistent fly on the Shepard’s head and used a large stone to kill the fly.
Well, Bush and his little man Blair are our friendly bears and unfortunately for all of us, Hezbollah is the snake.
Who befitted from war on Imaginary Weapons of mass distraction. Iraqis, USA, UK or Iran and Syria? Now, who is going cap in hand asking Iranians to get them out of qudmire that Iraq has become and who is going to stop Iranian Mullahs in developing real weapons of mass distraction? Little men Blair and Bush? The same Bush and Blair who are begging for Iranian help? The Axis of evil to rescue? Suddenly, Iranian Atomic bomb is forgotten.
Let’s study the second pretence for the war. The Iraqi freedom. Us and UK have lost the war in Iraq; they are leaving the Iraqis to the Iranian Mullahs. Ask any Iraqi, which they choose. Iranian Mullahs or Sadam.
Finally, the latest excuse for the war. War on terror. Are we safer? Was Sadam a terrorist? Was Sadam a religious Moslem? And why is that only US and UK are defending the world against terrorism? Are the rest of the world blissfully unaware? And the most relevant question of all, is getting in bed with Iranian Mullahs who are the Hezbollah masters stop the terrorists?
Sadly Bush and Blair don't learn and make the same mistakes every time. The latest one is condemnation of killers of Lebanese minister.
Just don’t get involved. But NO, Blair Bush have to go further tan condemnations. They name murderers without any doubts in their little minds. As if the killers care. These strong condemnations and name calling only strengthen Hezbollah and weaken the Lebanie's government. After Israeli invasion and loosing to Hezbollah in Lebanon. Moslems and some Christians found faith in Hezbollah and most Christians blamed their pro western government. The west who failed to condemn Israeli distraction of their country. The Israel which is the west’s agent and caused death distraction in their country? How many Hezbollah fighters were on Lebanese oil terminals? Why did Israel attack and cause such a distraction to Lebaines pro American government or cause environmental catastrophes.
We are better not having Bush and Blair inour camp. Friend like these who needs enemies?
Regards
Barry
Barry/Mr Opinionated (73),
I read your post with interest and find much of your argument persuasive. Thank you for some thought-provoking words.
I am a little worried though, about the repeated use of "Bush and Blair" - and this is common across the news media, not just here. It makes it seem as if decisions about foreign policy are somehow taken jointly by the US and the UK. I suspect Mr Blair doesn't have nearly as much influence as thus implied - and I do believe that any influence that he does have is used in a much different and more positive way than is widely speculated. I wouldn't be surpsried if this belief of mine attracts much derision and disagreement, which, I'm afraid, I won't take seriously unless it is supported by some sort of evidence (we can all through accusations and opinions around but that doesn't add anything to a debate). And before I'm 'blown up by my own bomb' (copyright, Dr Hackenbush) I will say that I do have good reason and some (small, admittedly) evidence for my beliefs.
Fascinating stuff today folks.
Barry and Aperitif,
Bush & Blair, eh? Bush needed Blair to give him some credibilityand supposed respectability. The Americans LOVED our PM for that very reason, but they have begun to see through him and his shoulder-rubbing buddy. I don't believe Blair has had ANY influence for the better. I was prepared to give him the benefit of the doubt in 2001, when I thought that by going 'shoulder to shoulder' (a different posture comes to mind) he would be able to hold Bush back from stupid knee-jerk (second bit especially!) reaction. In the end, he lost whatever honour he had left and for nothing!
The best and most considered reaction I have seen is linked below. Would that the XXVII points made had been heeded.
"XXI. What leads to peace is not violence but peaceableness, which is not passivity, but an alert, informed, practiced, and active state of being. We should recognize that while we have extravagantly subsidized the means of war, we have almost totally neglected the ways of peaceableness. We have, for example, several national military academies, but not one peace academy. We have ignored the teachings and the examples of Christ, Gandhi, Martin Luther King, and other peaceable leaders. And here we have an inescapable duty to notice also that war is profitable, whereas the means of peaceableness, being cheap or free, make no money.
XXII. The key to peaceableness is continuous practice. It is wrong to suppose that we can exploit and impoverish the poorer countries, while arming them and instructing them in the newest means of war, and then reasonably expect them to be peaceable.
-- Wendell Berry
Dorood
ed
Did you see Esther Rantzen on Question Time tonight? Nice to see someone with public respect sticking her head above the parapet rather than just going along with received wisdom.
I wonder, Ed, what evidence you have for your belief that Blair has had no influence for the better?
Aperitif,
If Blair has had any influence, how much more stupidly or disastrously could the whole mess have been handled?
Neither one, so far as I can see can even lie believably, but maybe I'm just too cynical. I find it difficult to believe how such supposedly clever and perceptive folk can say and do the things they do and actually believe other folk can't see through them.
Blair, along with his good buddy, stood blatantly by while Israel wantonly destroyed the infrastructure of Lebanon and the 'western-oriented' government of that sad country pleaded for it to stop or be stopped. All this on the pretext of a minor border incident of dubious initiation.
I don't want you to reveal anything you shouldn't, but can you provide ANY evidence of Blair's ameliorating influence. I think he's waiting to join the Carlyle group.
And, how about this- 19 dead "terrorists" and loads of destruction to capture a grocer and his family on the basis of a shared name.
As Barry might say, with friends like that, no wonder we have enemies!
Sorry, but you've hit a raw nerve.
Dorood (for Barry)
Salaam/Shalom/Shanthi/Peace (for the rest)
ed
For Aperitif
By Chris Floyd, TO UK Correspondent
t r u t h o u t | Perspective
Thursday 14 September 2006
1. Staggering to the Exit
"It may look and feel like a farce right now, but one day some future Shakespeare might write it as a tragedy: the fall of a powerful, popular leader broken on the wheel of war."
"For make no mistake: if not for the criminal folly of the Iraq invasion, British Prime Minister Tony Blair would not have been unceremoniously shoved toward the exit last week by his own party, including some of his fiercest loyalists. The man who once commanded one of the largest majorities in the history of the ancient British Parliament, who won three successive national elections and appeared to have sealed his party's hold on power for decades to come, has seen his stature and authority eaten away by the hubris that led him to join George W. Bush's duplicitous, disastrous Babylonian Conquest....."
I'll hold the door for you Toady.
Aperitif,
I have just watched Esther and Polly, and I'm with Polly. Esther, for whom I have a lot of respect, behaved too much like a paranoid Zionist. She visibly bridled when Polly mentioned the wanton destruction of Lebanon, and said, "Why is it always our fault?"
Saddam was never a threat, except possibly to Israel, who would have squashed him like a fly.
Sorry, but on this we are poles apart.
Dorood
ed
Aperitif,
I have just watched Esther and Polly, and I'm with Polly. Esther, for whom I have a lot of respect, behaved too much like a paranoid Zionist. She visibly bridled when Polly mentioned the wanton destruction of Lebanon, and said, "Why is it always our fault?"
Saddam was never a threat, except possibly to Israel, who would have squashed him like a fly.
Sorry, but on this we are poles apart.
Dorood
ed