HAVING served in the Afghanistan war as a captain of a C-130 Hercules, I have always been convinced that Michael Portillo and his party made the wrong call about Iraq (Oh what a disastrous war — but there’s no easy exit, Comment, last week).

I am no great fan of Ken Clarke but it would have been wiser to have backed his more traditional Tory instinct. It was an opportunity to take a moral stand against the war.

Everyone I served with in Afghanistan was up for the task. I was proud to risk my own life in numerous sorties. However, there was little discernible support among the troops for the Iraq war.

A close friend of mine was killed in the Hercules that was shot down by insurgents earlier this year. While attending the wake of my friend and his colleagues, I asked a senior officer what he might say to the children if they asked if their daddy had died for a cause worth dying for. To his absolute credit, he told me that he did not believe in the war in Iraq and that he did not see it as a worthy cause.

Strategically we are now facing the break-up of Iraq, with the prospect of a fundamentalist alliance between southern Iraq and the Iranians and no democracy in sight. This, at a time of already dangerously high oil prices, could easily tip the world into a crisis with severe economic and political consequences. Sadly nobody has resigned, the grandees in the political parties are still there and so are the senior military officers who blindly followed the wishes of their political bosses. I, for one, have voted with my feet and decided to leave the military behind.

Flt Lt (retired) Nigel Gilbert
Clane, Wiltshire

NO TURNING BACK: We are where we are. The objective of a democratic Iraq must still be achieved, however difficult that path may now seem. The alternative has far more serious implications for our futures in the West than most people seem to appreciate.

This is not just about Iraq. Al-Zawahiri’s strategy is having remarkable success. That success, if it continues, means that we might lose and not just in Iraq.

The issue should not be the safety of our soldiers, however important that is. It is this lack of conviction within our democracies that is both understood and exploited ruthlessly by both the mullahs of Iran and Al-Qaeda (together with their extremist supporters).

Tim Grant
London W1

REASONS TO GO: I opposed the war on the following grounds: 1. No British interests were involved (this is traditional Conservative policy and the party would have won a landslide had it opposed the war). 2. It would make us and America more hated than ever. 3. The results of stirring up such an unstable area as the Middle East would lead to unpredictable consequences. 4. It would increase the extent of terrorism. 5. The actual aim of the war was not the stated one but, so far as the US was concerned, an understandable but mistaken desire to hit out at someone because of the September 11 atrocity, coupled with a desire to protect the interests of Israel.

Portillo seems to think the anti-war group needs to come up with a solution for the mess that the pro-war group has led us into. The solution is to admit we have lost the war and get out now. The results will be terrible, but they will be even worse if we stay. The best we can do is recover ground with the Arab and Muslim world by responding to some of their grievances.

Dr Frank Watson
Guildford, Surrey