Those who are interested in a well-informed, objective view from overseas of the Bush administration's drive for war should check out this article in the London Review of Books by Anatole Lieven of the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace in Washington DC. Here's the close . . .

Twice now in the past decade, the overwhelming military and economic dominance of the US has given it the chance to lead the rest of the world by example and consensus. It could have adopted (and to a very limited degree under Clinton did adopt) a strategy in which this dominance would be softened and legitimised by economic and ecological generosity and responsibility, by geopolitical restraint, and by 'a decent respect to the opinion of mankind', as the US Declaration of Independence has it. The first occasion was the collapse of the Soviet superpower enemy and of Communism as an ideology. The second was the threat displayed by al-Qaida. Both chances have been lost - the first in part, the second it seems conclusively. What we see now is the tragedy of a great country, with noble impulses, successful institutions, magnificent historical achievements and immense energies, which has become a menace to itself and to mankind.

The article is long and depends to some extent on familiarity with historical events which may be unfamiliar to US readers. But that's the point: it's our characteristic ignorance which is making possible the tragic and ill-considered push toward military intervention in the Middle East. If you want simple explanations, you can say "It's all about oil." But more significantly, it's about what happens when "the worst are full of passionate intensity." Or when our Supreme Court decides an election for us on purely partisan grounds, in favor of someone with REAL, not PR, character weaknesses.