Washington Post comment OK, not the greatest source of proper reportage, but I do think it's important that we (well, fcuk we, I mean the US) examine what helped to turn an initially favourable situation into a paddling-pool gangwank of rather large proportions. There were lots of factors that lead to the current unpleasentness, not least the Iraqi's themselves, but the overriding naivite of the coalition certainly didn't help. It's also too easy to blame GWB's administration, as I rememeber watching the first bombs fall on Baghdad and the overriding opinion of those (somewhat illustrious) preople present was that the Yanks would own the combat phase, but stuff up the follow-on work - and that's well before we knew how crazy the neocons were. They're just like every other nation, they'd rather paint over embarrassing episodes than learn from them - instead of regarding their ops in SE Asia (and examples such as Vann) as costly lessons, they made films about the tragic minutiae and committed themsleves to making sure "them darn hippies" didn't lose the war for them this time around, which sort of misses the point. For the UK's part, we should stop electing governments that are too busy wowing us with nice hair and right-on Richard and Judy politics and start producing political animals who can actually cut it on a world stage. Giving the micks what they wanted and bombing serb bridges isn't the same thing.