Would it really be irresponsible to pull out of Iraq? Humbly, I suggest not.

The killing and bombing of the innocents is totally unacceptable and it may not stop for a generation.

The effects of the Bush/Blair "liberation" are entirely negative - as predicted.

The alternatives are tough but the facts must be faced. The US and coalition forces must withdraw after the January elections and allow the Iraqis, freed from the grip of Saddam Hussein, to sort out their own salvation.

What alternatives would the Iraqis then face?

1. If the party elected was unable to keep the peace, it would be at liberty to invite a strictly UN peace-keeping force to help.

2. If the ruling faction turned out to be undemocratic, rejecting power sharing or even tolerance of "the rest", determined to impose its ideas by dictatorship, then "the rest" would have two peaceful options: To accept or to leave. If the latter, then the US and coalition countries would have to take full responsibility for resettling the refugees since it is the Bush/Blair axis which created the post-war mess.

3, If, however, neither silent acquiescence nor exile were acceptable options to these "disenfranchised", they would then have but one final route remaining - civil disorder, secession or civil war. It is not hard to imagine that this proud, honourable and civilised people might prefer death by an Iraqi bullet than by an illegal American one.

Bush and Blair must realise the hypocritical morality which sustains their continued intrusion on sovereign Iraqi territory is the fuse which will burn relentlessly towards the explosion of the whole Middle Eastern powder-keg - and possibly beyond.

These two instigators of this disastrous and illegal war must withdraw their nations' forces as soon as the January elections are over - and endure their personal shame.

-Richard Franklin, Brighton