Britain and America have taken a step closer to military action in the Gulf following the withdrawal of the UN weapons inspectors from the Iraqi capital Baghdad.

Britain's Defence Secretary, George Robertson, says that the Iraqi leader Saddam Hussein "only shows respect for diplomacy when it is backed by military strength and readiness."

But are Britain and America right to take a tough stance against Iraq and risk the possiblity of a military confrontation while most other nations urge a cautious approach in the Gulf? Or is the threat of force the only way to guarantee peace?

Is force necessary?

Violence might work if Saddam had any care for the safety of the Iraqi population, but he clearly has none...
John Luby, Scotland

Your reaction in full

Back to top | BBC News Home | BBC Homepage	©