Let me just add (and correct me if I am wrong gbaikie), that I think primary issue of discussion in the sub-thread can be summarized as follows:

1) Our presence in Saudi Arabia has had a negative effect on relations with Arab states (proximity of forces next tothe 'holy' sites of islam)

2) One point issued in favor of war with Iraq would be that it would obviate the need for military resence in Saudi Arabia. (No further possible hostility from Iraq and/or we can rely upon our bases in Iraq for military presence)

3) My position on (2) is that it would not alleviate tensions that much, if at all. We would still have troops 'around the bend' from the holy sites of Islam (Iraq/SA aint quite that big...). And we would be running and occupying an ethnically Arab and Muslim state.

4) Gbaikie states that UN/NATO and other countries would provide policing/occupation duties (could be called the Afghan model?). This would reduce tensions as it would not exactly be our troops on the street corner.

5) I do not think we will get that kind of support- and perhaps I am wrong... I will add that even if we do, it will still likely be seen as 'our' war and 'our' occupation given the total lack of other militaries being involved.

We are talking about prediction and not visible fact, so likely both of us will be wrong. So I suggest a bet since we are likely to find out in about a month whats going to happen.

Is that a fair summary of the debate up to now Gbaikie? I will respond to your latest message soon, but meanwhile please add/correct my summary.

Also, Gbaikie, Assuming we *want* continued military presence in the M.E., where would we base the troops if not in Iraq or Saudi Arabia?

I will write more later.

Davin L.