* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
The home secretary, David Blunkett, said this morning: "There is no point in getting to war unless you know what the objective is, that you weighed up what the consequences would be in erms of other major events that affect social cohesion or support
The US vice-president, Dick Cheney, shied away from any specific threat against Iraq on his flying visit to London today, saying his 12-day trip was a time for "frank discussions, not making announcements".
Ahead of visits to 11 countries in the Middle East, Mr Cheney refused to answer a direct question on what evidence the US had of Saddam Hussein's capabilities with nuclear, chemical or biological weapons.
Instead, in a joint press conference at No 10 with Tony Blair, the vice-president warned of the "potential marriage" between groups such as al-Qaida seeking nuclear weapons, and states such as Iraq.
He told reporters: "We know from our work in Afghanistan that they [al-Qaida] were aggressively seeking to acquire the same weapons [of mass destruction.] How far they got, we don't know."
Mr Cheney left it for the prime minister to detail a specific charge sheet against the Iraqi dictator.
The prime minister declared that Saddam had "acquired weapons of mass destruction over a long time".
He added: "The issue of weapons of mass destruction will have to be addressed but no decision has yet been taken on how we proceed."
The only olive branch to those on his own backbenches or the country at large, hoping to avert an all-out attack on Baghadad, was Mr Blair's assertion that the coalition must be "calm and measured".
Mr Cheney, who is making his first overseas trip as vice-president, and has been kept as at undisclosed secure location since September 11, joked: "I checked in first with the prime minister before I went down to a part of the world he knows so well."
Quizzed about the bloodshed in the Israeli-Palestinian conflict in relation to the build-up against Afghanistan, Mr Cheney replied that he thought it was "inappropriate to say these issues were linked".
He added: "We have an obligation to deal with both separately."
The visit came on a day when Richard Pearle, US president George Bush's defence adviser, rejected the idea of sending weapons inspectors back to Iraq, saying it would achieve nothing.
He also criticised Europe's lukewarm response to the ratcheting up of pressure on Iraq by Washington.
He told the BBC: "I am certainly disappointed with a number of our friends in Europe who pay very close attention to threats to their security, but when the threats are to American security, they are no-where to be found."
The home secretary, David Blunkett, said this morning: "There is no point in getting to war unless you know what the objective is, that you weighed up what the consequences would be in erms of other major events that affect social cohesion or support.
"But equally that we don't abandon the idea of taking on what in five years' time might turn out to be a major threat from Saddam Hussein developing those kind of weapons which do threaten us, not just because we are in the west but because these days we are interdependent globally in a way that was never true before.
In parliament, more than 70 MPs have signed a motion urging a peaceful response to the Iraqi threat, and the SNP has put down a motion demanding any military action is authorised by a new UN mandate.
Clare Short, the cabinet member thought to be an opponent of military action against Baghdad, said yesterday she was not opposed to seeing an end to the Saddam Hussein regime, she did not want "more attacks on the poor old Iraqi people".
The home secretary, David Blunkett, said this morning: "There is no point in getting to war unless you know what the objective is, that you weighed up what the consequences would be in erms of other major events that affect social cohesion or support
The US vice-president, Dick Cheney, shied away from any specific threat against Iraq on his flying visit to London today, saying his 12-day trip was a time for "frank discussions, not making announcements".
Ahead of visits to 11 countries in the Middle East, Mr Cheney refused to answer a direct question on what evidence the US had of Saddam Hussein's capabilities with nuclear, chemical or biological weapons.
Instead, in a joint press conference at No 10 with Tony Blair, the vice-president warned of the "potential marriage" between groups such as al-Qaida seeking nuclear weapons, and states such as Iraq.
He told reporters: "We know from our work in Afghanistan that they [al-Qaida] were aggressively seeking to acquire the same weapons [of mass destruction.] How far they got, we don't know."
Mr Cheney left it for the prime minister to detail a specific charge sheet against the Iraqi dictator.
The prime minister declared that Saddam had "acquired weapons of mass destruction over a long time".
He added: "The issue of weapons of mass destruction will have to be addressed but no decision has yet been taken on how we proceed."
The only olive branch to those on his own backbenches or the country at large, hoping to avert an all-out attack on Baghadad, was Mr Blair's assertion that the coalition must be "calm and measured".
Mr Cheney, who is making his first overseas trip as vice-president, and has been kept as at undisclosed secure location since September 11, joked: "I checked in first with the prime minister before I went down to a part of the world he knows so well."
Quizzed about the bloodshed in the Israeli-Palestinian conflict in relation to the build-up against Afghanistan, Mr Cheney replied that he thought it was "inappropriate to say these issues were linked".
He added: "We have an obligation to deal with both separately."
The visit came on a day when Richard Pearle, US president George Bush's defence adviser, rejected the idea of sending weapons inspectors back to Iraq, saying it would achieve nothing.
He also criticised Europe's lukewarm response to the ratcheting up of pressure on Iraq by Washington.
He told the BBC: "I am certainly disappointed with a number of our friends in Europe who pay very close attention to threats to their security, but when the threats are to American security, they are no-where to be found."
The home secretary, David Blunkett, said this morning: "There is no point in getting to war unless you know what the objective is, that you weighed up what the consequences would be in erms of other major events that affect social cohesion or support.
"But equally that we don't abandon the idea of taking on what in five years' time might turn out to be a major threat from Saddam Hussein developing those kind of weapons which do threaten us, not just because we are in the west but because these days we are interdependent globally in a way that was never true before.
In parliament, more than 70 MPs have signed a motion urging a peaceful response to the Iraqi threat, and the SNP has put down a motion demanding any military action is authorised by a new UN mandate.
Clare Short, the cabinet member thought to be an opponent of military action against Baghdad, said yesterday she was not opposed to seeing an end to the Saddam Hussein regime, she did not want "more attacks on the poor old Iraqi people".
Comment