|You are in: Programmes: Panorama|
If you would like to comment on the After Saddam programme from Sunday, 13 April then click here to find an email form.
Then simply fill in the email form, complete with name, e-mail address, town and country and hit the send button.
A selection of e-mails will be published on this page after the programme on Sunday, 13 April. Due to the high number of e-mails we get we cannot guarantee to publish every single message we receive. We may also edit some e-mails for purposes of clarity and length.
The e-mails published will be reflective of the messages we have been sent.
All along Bush and Blair insisted that Saddam have weapon of mass destruction. Where is the weapon now that almost all Iraq is under their control?
The first thing the US forces did on entering Iraq was "secure" the oil fields. But when it comes to protecting the National Musuem or Hospitals, Donald Rumsfeld feels it is not their responsibility. Clearly shows where their priorities lie.
How bizarre of Panorama to ignore how the USA dealt with Germany and Japan after the Second World War. Surely the two most important models that the US authorities will be using as fundamental reference points for how they should act in Iraq? Why did Panorama not give a summary of how the Marshall Plan worked, and how General Douglas MacArthur set about rebuilding Japan? Although over 50 years have elapsed since, those immensely important experiences are worth retelling, both to inform us more about how Americans see themselves - and where they are coming from - and to counter the notion so warmly allowed to develop by the BBC that there is a vacuum in American policy and that the USA hasn't a clue what to do next.
After watching Panorama about Iraq last night, I've got another question for you: is Panorama always like that? The questions were interesting and to the point, the answers brief, intelligent, and informative. The whole programme was well paced and never once boring. I have to say it was a fascinating, outstandingly good programme. Any chance of you repeating it?
Also, with all the millions spent on this war, why didn't the US army invest in having Arabic speakers 'embedded' and a few hand written Arabic signs instead of those ridiculous electronic 'talking machines'. It would have cost less bloodshed and heartache for the poor civilians of Iraq who have been murdered by US soldiers at check points. I realise a lot of the young US soldiers are out of their depth and do not have the experience or professionalism that our UK army has. I blame their crazy superiors at the Pentagon for sending out young soldiers without the necessary training.
This Panorama looked like it was cobbled together in five minutes. No real expert speakers but BBC journalists. I thought journalists get the facts and give the story. Last night they were asked personal opinion, only two were actually based in the field (Iraq). Precious few Iraqi's were actually asked any questions.
This was no more than a collection of talking heads, more a media love-in than challenging and well presented current affairs. In fact after all that talking at the end of the programme one of the panel admitted that they were all scrabbling around for answers and didn't really know what was going to happen! I have an idea, why not find the movers and shakers in this process and ask them?
When will people realise that just because the BBC isn't explicitly pro-war, it doesn't mean they are "Anti-American" either. I've found the Beeb to be one of the least biased news sources out there during this whole thing. Well done on the informative discussion, BBC.
There have been a number of letters in Scottish newspapers recently critical of this programme and watching last night I can see why, because you are apologists for the British state and its affection for war. I lived through WW2 as an infant and can remember bombs crashing down on Glasgow while in our garden air raid shelter and I am aware how infinitely worse this war must be form the children of Iraq, the second against them in just over decade. You were almost sycophantic last night about the unspeakable Blair, who not only does the bidding of Rumsfeld, Wolfowitz and the far right neocons, but positively drives them on. The question now is not 'if' but 'when' the next war will be ,because the neocon agenda is for permanent war, a global fascism which in the latter years of my life saddens and terrifies me because it brings dark and evil clouds over the lives of my grandchildren.
If the count of the countries is more for USA and UK then I salute them. If it is not then I consider this as an arrogance of a powerful nation in the world and this will create more trouble in the future of the world
Capitalism always needs new markets, and Iraq will definitely be theirs, even after the U.S. soldiers have gone home.
The reason why the Coalition won the war in such a short time is that the majority of Iraqi's decided not to fight. The reason for this decision appears obvious enough given Saddam's regime. What beggars belief is the quoted opinion of Arab people who seem to think it was the Iraqi's duty to die so that they could feel better about being a Muslim. The Arab media and elite have a lot to answer for.
Why is it so wrong for the US to be vilified for sorting out regimes based on murder and fear. I am sure that all those in the coalition regret civilian deaths yet many of the criticising nations were seen dancing in the streets when nearly 3000 civilians were murdered on Sept 11.
Information wise high-density programme. Absolutely great. On the setting: I cannot help thinking - what a pity that since the September programme you have slid from a lively workshop-like setting to the traditional immobile dark suits/wise men at a table and a beautiful young lady doing the walking around - like a quiz programme. Depressing note for an otherwise brilliant programme.
The British and American forces are not conversant with how local democracy works. Clearly the way forward is to divide the cities into a grid pattern of small blocks and ask the local Iraqis in each block to elect a number of representatives that they trust to enforce law. These trusted locals form a committee and each of these committees elect one person, that they trust to form a parliament. If the commanders in the field need me to draw a diagram, I am happy to oblige.
Looking a few years ahead based on present events, it seems almost inevitable that there will be a new cold war, with America on one side and Europe on the other. The only thing that can prevent this (barring a marked change of policy from the U.S.) is the UK's constant transatlantic bridge-building. So keep it up, Britain! Only please bear in mind that building bridges doesn't mean choosing America over Europe each and every time.
Manlafy Jammeh, Gambia
I believe that when countries see a democratic Iraq neighbour and peer at their own dictators (which Saddam Hussein propped up) we will see far LESS terrorism as these middle east countries seek democracy for themselves. The people will purge these extremists as they join a wider world.
In an aside to a previous email who commented on why should the middle east accept a western idea like democracy my question is this: whoever said democracy was a western ideology?
But I wonder how things were a few days after Germany and Japan capitulated. My personal opinion is that this will take its natural cause, and I think is too much hype, because most commentators and others got it wrong. America, Britain got it right, as usual.
This Panorama programme is outstanding. The BBC correspondents are
statesmanlike in their understanding and appraisal. Please try to get this programme onto US television even if you have to
give it free. Well done all at Panorama.
Ulf Schmidt, Canterbury
I was shocked and appalled by the consistent anti-coalition bias in today's programme, both in terms of the lack of representation of viewers comment (not least several video interviews from Damascus), the loading of questions by Gavin, and the lack of clarity, balance and depth of the answers given by the panel. The exception was a couple of John Simpson's comments with regard to what Arab leaders might say in public and why, and what they might believe privately. Panorama as a whole continues to dumb down difficult issues, and puts political expediency ahead of fair, incisive, factual journalism. Even the French press agrees that removing Saddam was a good thing. The powers that control panorama and the BBC clearly do not.
Having just watched the excellent Panorama on Iraq, I was aware that most of the questions asked where the same that I asked on an American political Message Board. I tend to only ask the questions, provocatively I admit, but their responses are alarming to say the least. A core of 'Texan militants' seem not able to give reasonable answers. They don't seem to think through and beyond the War. I fear that many Americans like this are backing/driving Bush, and I see the 'peace' will be a considerably harder to achieve. Steve Lill
The blow dealt by the rift within Europe to possible increased federalism (common constitution, defence policy etc, even perhaps currency) plays very deftly into Tony Blair's hand as these issues were a time bomb waiting to explode for him. In spite of having been electorally popular these last 2 elections he would have great difficulty with a very large spectrum of the voting population with these issues coming to a head. The split between the UK and France/Germany on these matters whilst being politically fixable in the near to medium term scuppers the big federalist ideas in the medium to long term thus sidestepping a difficult issue for Tony Blair.
Jimmy Hughes, Stirling, Scotland
What a disappointment tonight's programme was. Instead of an informative debate on the current/future situation, all we saw was something that resembled an uneasy compromise between a quiz show and a Government 'sponsored' briefing. Firstly, what was the purpose of the female who bobbed about reading an autocue and resembling nothing more than the magician's 'glamorous' assistant? Since when has BBC News used women in this manner? Secondly, the BBC did not go to much trouble in terms of capturing the opinions of 'real life' Iraqi people. All of the comments shown have been broadcast previously in a different contexts. And why did we hear opinions from people in Australia? Not exactly a 'front line state' despite its support for the coalition. If Australian's are being canvassed, why not views from Spanish and Portuguese? At least they turned up at the Azores 'summit'. This was the worst kind of 'let's put something together quickly' programme. And it showed. Who cares if one of the correspondent's spouses can go home 'within the next year'? People are dying in Iraq NOW and demanding to know what 'liberation' will bring to them!
How refreshing, for a change, and important to hear an on the ground analysis by intelligent men instead of all this self-serving rubbish by politicians who insult our intelligence and think they're kidding us
I am ashamed to be British. Having lived through one world war, I never thought that I'd see a Labour Prime Minister join a right wing belligerent USA president in attacking a country with weapons of mass destruction, including cluster bombs, killing civilians and children. To see a young boy, with no arms so severely burnt, his parents killed was too distressing to describe. This brutal war will only add to the violence in the world bring more hate and despair.
In addition, The Victorian Peace Network (41 affiliated organisations) in Australia have instructed solicitors, Slater and Gordon, to serve a letter on the Prime Minister of Australia of possible future charges of complicity in potential war crimes for himself and other Ministers in his government.
Finally, in the Koran, there is a 'revelations' section, where it demands that all Muslims rise up and save the world from the great infidel. I don't know the exact entry, but in essence it says that Armageddon will be initiated in Iraq, that Iraq will be split in two (North/South) and the great Infidel will be a non-Muslim. Sound familiar?
I for one am appalled at the idea that the BBC could be anti-Coalition because the taxpayers of the UK pay a substantial about for the TV license to hear an fair, un-biased opinion of what┐s going on in such troubled places such as Iraq, yet I, and others feel the BBC are letting us down by presenting the news which tries to destroy the good work done by the Coalition forces.
I think that the UN will leave New York within 10 years. Hopefully the diplomatic world centre of gravity will change with a more US enlightened leader.
The US and Britain have already caused enough tension by invading Iraq. They will play into the hands of the extremists if they make the mistake of invading Syria or for that matter any other country. The sooner they drop that idea from their agenda the better it will be for everyone.
Funny how the oil reserves were well protected. Where were the US and British soldiers when the hospitals, museums were being looted??
Steve Fuller, England
I am watching Panorama on BBC. Is there any chance you could find one person who supports Tony Blair and George Bush or will you continue this relentless anti-war anti-Americanism? I watch BBC T.V. and listen to BBC radio. The anti-American views never stop even when the Iraqis welcome them. Do you realise you are doing this?
Having spent the duration of the war in Egypt, what do I come back to. Panoramic over dramatization of a new American empire, what tosh, I expect this attitude from the continual complaining of the Arabs and the eternal whining of Islam who continue to encourage killing as some holy duty. How fed up I am of the western world walking around on eggshells in case Arabs / Islamists are insulted. Meanwhile I wish the BBC and their intrepid newshounds would cease this yah-boo delivery of events in Iraq, all you seem capable of reporting is every hiccup or set-back and apparently drooling over these setbacks.
The Coalition invasion on Iraq was like the All Black Rugby Team playing against the Brownies (in terms of equipment, power etc) Bush stated that Saddam and his weapons of mass destruction had to be removed as they were a threat to their neighbours and the rest of the world...this now has been proved not to be the case. Also America now appear to be warning Syria, it is hardly surprising that people are now cynical.
Frank Clode, Britain
Tony Blair and Bush usually talks about the reconstruction of Iraq. I remember Blair made a commitment to reconstruct Afghanistan.
Looking at the war scenario it looks more likely that once an interim government is set up and all seems to be well, when the troops leave we would be in for a coup which will most likely come from either the Sunnis or the Shias. Unfortunately the Kurds are the sufferers. The trust will be hard to swallow.
You only have to listen to the post war talk coming from America to know that they will soon be on their way into other Arab states.
Haven't the Iraqis just adequately demonstrated what a lawless and ill-disciplined society they are without extremely powerful leadership and control?
I have worked in the oil industry for over 30 years and have spent time in Iraq operating within this industry. I also spent time as an NGO taking aid to Bosnia on behalf of people in the are I now live. I am amazed at the ability of the coalition forces that they can move around the country with ease airlifting POWs out and the world led to believe the horror they have endured . But the images that have been the fore front of reporters have been the innocent children maimed by the fierce attacks on the cities of Iraq. I also saw the film of the wonderful hospital ship that lies off the coast awaiting the casualties of the conflict which have been relatively small than God. Why is that facility not being used to help and save these poor severely injured people.
I don't think that this will stop here! I just hope that Britain get out of this whole conflict before America decide to attack Syria.
I'm not aware that there was a popular revolt necessitating a certain need for a change of government in Iraq by the rest of the world, as we saw in Venezuela and the likes. I thought it was a matter of weapons of mass destruction, which we are still expecting to find anyway. The question then is: Isn't this a bad example of how to invade a country so brazenly especially with the clear un-preparedness for the consequences, like in looting and absolute lawlessness as we now witness. And a plan for a reconstruction team [interim government as I see it]?
Shouldn't the UN inspectors be back in Iraq ASAP to continue their work given the importance of the discovery of WMD , I for one would like independent verification that any WMD found are indeed Iraq's and not a CIA planted cache to justify their war.
Darren Williams, Rochdale, UK
In the last few days I have read and heard of the "surprise" of other Arab countries at the lack of resistance by Iraq to the coalition forces. This would appear to be in direct contrast to the obvious jubilation experienced by Iraqi citizens at the fall of Saddam Hussein. Also today I have heard a professor at Baghdad University expressing his anger that the Iraqi army did not oust the regime sooner. It would appear to me therefore, that Arab nations place Arab solidarity above the freedom of their citizens. This apparent lack of concern for the individual is reflected in the leadership of many neighbouring Arab states which are more authoritarian than democratic. What therefore is the future for democracy in Iraq and the Gulf, and improved relations with the West.
To avoid this country going to war again in the future without the consent of the people of the UK, should not all MP's be now discussing removing the Prime Ministers 'Royal Prerogative'?
Why were measures not implemented to protect the people of Iraq from the ensuing chaos that would inevitably follow the downfall of Saddam's brutal regime? I believe without a doubt that the Iraqi people deserve to celebrate their freedom, but surely the looting of hospitals and universities is not going to help rebuild their future. Those who began the war had an obligation to protect the people of Iraq, and once again they have been let down.
what is the difference between flying back injured troops to the U.K or U.S and flying The 12 year old Iraqi boy, from Baghdad, Ali for life saving treatment? What exactly is the problem? How come Iraqis are short of food and water and the coalition troops aren't? Or are they? There is so much I just cannot understand.
Dr Dorota Hunt, UK
If no WMD are found, will Tony Blair resign after misleading the UK people over the motives for this war that has brought death and destruction to women and children in Iraq. I can see no other honourable course of action for him.
How can we seriously believe that the trade off for this war is progress in the peace process in Palestine when the UK government has not even made the slightest protest about the latest killing of an innocent UK citizen in Gaza, by Israeli military forces?
A writer in the Independent recently used the phrase 'fear is a strong glue' Surely now that Saddam seems to have gone Iraq will go the way of the Soviet Union and Yugoslavia and will break up. And why shouldn't they?
The three groups live in a country that was cobbled together without their consent. Also the concept of democracy only works if the people who make it work are sufficiently united. The question must be ' are you prepared to take part in an election even if means being ruled by the other lot for the next five years - or are the differences between the groups too deep for this?
On a pre-war BBC debate a senior Saudi figure said that Islam and democracy were incompatible. I suppose that it would be unlikely t have a party which committed to the creation of an Islamic society and is prepared to see such a society made, rejected and remade every five years according to the whim of the electorate.
Disclaimer: The BBC will put up as many of your comments as possible but we cannot guarantee that all e-mails will be published. The BBC reserves the right to edit comments that are published.
Top Panorama stories now:
Links to more Panorama stories are at the foot of the page.
|E-mail this story to a friend|
To BBC Sport>> | To BBC Weather>> | To BBC World Service>>
© MMIII | News Sources | Privacy