The Guardian | This drive to war: Pithy summary of relevant arguments: "it is the utter confidence of the American war party in the rightness of its cause that is the best argument of its opponents. How can there be such an unblinking conviction that its course is right in as uncertain and as complex, and as new a world as the one we are living in today? ..
But here it is necessary to be as hard on many of the opponents of war as on its proposers, as well as to clear away the misleading idea that evidence that Saddam is concealing weapons of mass destruction is at the centre of the argument. It is at the centre of the manoeuvring, yes, but not of the argument. Among those knowledgeable about Iraq there are few, if any, who believe he is not hiding such weapons. It is a given. We print accounts of them, with diagrams and charts, in our newspapers every day. That is why both the Americans and the British insist that it is not just a matter of the inspectors being able to go where they please, but of Iraq handing over the weapons that everybody knows they have.
In these circumstances, to treat Iraq as if it were an Agatha Christie thriller which it is necessary to read to the end is ludicrous. Of course, to wait for the moment of discovery may well be the right course procedurally, because it means the appropriate UN resolutions can be invoked. It may also be the right course psychologically, because it affects public support. But acting as if it is still genuinely an open question whether Saddam is cheating is dishonest, and likely to be a cover for opposition to the war on other grounds..
It is also dishonest to argue that, with the inspectors ranging over the country without serious obstacle to their activities and with the Iraqi regime clearly in chastened mood, Iraq is now once again effectively contained, so there is no need for military force. .. Does anyone imagine that if those American troops were stood down, Iraqi co-operation would continue for long? " 3:59:02 AM