To Jerry in Little Rock: If you think the situation in Iraq is hellish now, just wait until there is a pull out of our troops. It will turn into another Rwanda where 100's of thousands were murdered. And when the dust is settled, the extremists will be in charge, setting up training camps. Granted, the war was not prosecuted correctly but, Colin Powell summed it up well with "You broke it, you bought it."

Hugh, York, Pennsylvania/USA

Gerard, go to the official Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama websites. They both claim they will end the war in Iraq, bring the troops home, but leave troops in Iraq for "logistics, force protection, training of the Iraqis, and 'counter-terrorisim'". So, despite all the bold talk to the left of the Democrat party, how are these positions any different than what Bush/Cheney have done? You can't do "counter-terrorism" with a few hundred troops.

Tony Francis, Wichita, KS/USA

Gerard,
What you say is well-written. But I must beg to differ with you about Iraq.
President Bush, made a terrible mistake by comitting our troops to an unnecessary conflict. Now he is trying to equate the war in Iraq with the world-wide war against terror.
You write that if the US leaves Iraq, chaos will result. We already have chaos; the situation there is hellish, and
hellish due ~only~ to our intervention. There were much better strategic choices which could have been made in the war against terror besides invading Iraq.
Due to the current surge (which you claim is working), the US is spending 12 billion dollars a month in Iraq. This kind of
insane spending can bankrupt a country (as it did the USSR) and this is a burden which no single country can afford. Our national debt is now over 8 trillion dollars - and there are not even one trillion stars in our galaxy!
This war is a failure and we must end it before it destroys us.

Jerry Murrel, Little Rock, USA/Arkansas

You could not be more wrong about immigration. Just before the fatal Senate vote, a Rasmussen poll showed that 70% of Americans were for legal immigration. Hardly a bunch of little Napoleons. Immigration is, as you say, in the great tradition of this country, but queue-jumping isn't. The proposed legislation would have rewarded millions of people who came in the back door to the detriment of those who, like myself, followed the law. They would have been made legal practically overnight with no background check (through Z-visas) and no encouragement to assimilate. They would have been granted benefits and tax breaks which the average citizen does not enjoy. And all that would have encouraged another wave of illegals and so on until the collapse of the nation's social support system. Historically, immigrants learned the language, assimilated and tried to contribute to the country which gave them their opportunity. Not this lot. No wonder the same 70% of Americans didn't want them.

John Pugmire, New York, USA

This writer once again ties himself in knots trying to support his cause. If democracy is that bad then it is not worth the life of one good man in spreading it overseas let alone supporting it at home.

Peter Donson, Southwell,Notts, UK

Gerard, I wonder your pre-occupation with word - Paranoid which you use more often then most of us. Is this how you view life? There is no denying that the state of our world could be much better and lets try to spread the mantra and make it so.

What you sow, so shell you reap! Write with the words like paranoid - most would respond in that manner. Convey an uplifting message; joy and positivity will emerge from all corners. Lets get rid of this paranoia and make it a joyous world - all year long!

Roger Martin, Auckland, NZ

John, Fairfax (McLean), Virginia ; two years ago I spent a good deal of time in Britain, France and Italy,a dn in all three countries I saw just what you described. And the people doing it were not exactly immigrants. So please don't believe those lies. It happens in Europe too.

RG, Cary,

"alone among industrialised nations its openness and ability to assimilate others" Not correct the UK also has the same capacity for openness and ability to assimilate others.

John Small, Faversham, UK

Mr. Baker, we as humans have the capability to colour our message as we please and pepper it with required justifications. What writers ought to do is to generate a ground swell against such glaring faultlines in our public policy - Iraq war and the simmering conflict in Palestine. It entails controlling the power of Military Industrial Empires and its agents not just in the US but in other countries including the UK. They dictate the policy and decide our fate in alliance with the clergy who inflame the innocent to pick up the gauntlet and face the modern killing machines in this war of the civilizations. And this makes for as gory a reality show as Independence Day for us to witness every day. It seems some people cherish this bloodletting and want it continue. What a shame.

Lets work in ending this war now and bringing all leaders including the clergy in denouncing violence in all its manifestations. Lets rid ouselves of this dark ages mentality and rise to our higherselves!

Roger Martin, Auckland, NZ

Max Bernstein from London is right. The Americans must throw in all the middle class families as well. But I suggest that they should do so after they have first thrown in all those who believe Israel is more important than America, since this war is largely a Tel Aviv inspired project. Mr Bernstein might even like to offer his services as well. And if after 6 months the situation shows no sign of improvement then perhaps we can revaluate it.

Francis Tuttle, Madrid,

Please do not worry. We the Americans will be in the Middle East as long as the Israelis want us there. When their money through their supporters stops coming to our politicians, then we will leave. So, you Arabs, don't bribe your people. There is more ROE in bribing our politicians.

Silenus, Chicago,

The answer in Iraq is obvious, let democracy run it's course through the actions of the elected officials.

Unfortunately in the great democratic way, those elected by the majority of the Iraq population are not allowed to form a government.

Why because that government is Shia and the Americans do not want a Shia government.

Result a government appointed by the Americans which is not representative of the vote of the people of Iraq.

If the Americans would let the freely elected government run the country for the Iraq people it would quickly get to grips with the situation.

Perhaps not to Americas liking but they would govern
according to the wishes of the Iraq population.

Then maybe the people of Iraq can start seeing electricity service back to Saddam days instead of a couple of hours a day, Also a start might be made to building Iraq infrastructure instead of US embassies and military bases which are of no use or interest to the people of Iraq.

alex hogg, san diego, us

The Iraq War was begun partly for Bush's vanity, partly to speed up the Second Coming of Jesus. Bring the troops home. They do the Iraqis no good.

Lester Ness, Kunming, China

We must face an inconvenient truth: various Middle Eastern states have long provided "safe havens" from which terror groups could plan and execute operations against "soft" western targets. Truly responsible democracies/leaders could no longer turn a blind eye to this state of affairs and had little choice but to take military action.................the basic fact is that American, British, & others troops are really in Iraq ( & Afghanistan ) to prevent violent extremists from being able to regroup and export their brand of warfare directly to American/European homelands. Unfortunately not all "western" democracies want to see this inconvenient truth ( the French in particular because they supplied Saddam with advanced military hardware and wanted payment prior to invasion ) and voted against multi lateral action leaving the USA & UK/Others in a unilateral dilemma: should we cut & run or stick it out for a long term solution…there is only one correct answer!

Chris Taylor, London, UK

The American people understand war. War is a terrible thing, but sometimes it is necessary. Once America in a war (it doesn't matter how or why) we must win, and we must win decisively. To do this, we must have leaders that have a plan for winning that requires nothing other than killing people and blowing up things. It must not require the cooperation or agreement of anyone else. If the leadership does not have such a plan, the American people will seek new leadership that does. If such leadership is not forthcoming, the American people will insist that we disengage. They are willing to take casualties in war, but not in a pointless war.

Louis R. Woodhill, Houston, USA/Texas

Our leaders allowed the US to be invaded and did nothing because the illegal immigrants help the economy. But it wasn't the American people who let the invasion happen, it was our government, the Mexican government and the work agreements between illegals and their employers, which caused it to happen. The immigration bill would have put a huge burden on the American taxpayer instead of the government doing their job. That's why we revolted. They wanted to make more laws when they were not even enforcing the ones we have! If we wanted an endless bureaucracy with no accountability then we would have supported it. How the article writer missed that I have no idea.

Mark, Vail, Colorado

May I remind the gentleman from Dallas that France, as well as other European countries, took part in the first gulf war and are still present in Afghanistan. 2 out of 3 is not too bas surely?

And where on earth did you get that any European country is supporting Islamists??

Thomas , London,

I was with you until the illegal immigration part. It is easy for an outsider to point to the US immigration woes as critics of the compromised bill as bigots or "nativists." But, I would ask the writer to name a single other country on this planet which would wholly allow 12 million illegal aliens to become legal immigrants over night? You report also neglects to mention the undue burden that such numbers have put on our middle class. Home builders, hotel and restaurant workers, and a slew of other assembly line workers have all lost their jobs and seen their wages decrease because of illegal immigration. The US is ready for a proper immigration plan, but the one proposed would only make the damages done to some of our most economically weak citizens permanent. I will agree with you that Iraq has jaded US politics, but the failure of the immigration bill was a sign that US politician are now starting to listen.

James, Atlanta, US, Georgia

John McCain's campaign is in trouble for one basic reason: The American people do not trust him.

GinnyD, Port Orange, FL

The comments here are bordering on the hysterical. Settle down everyone.

Americans have no problem with immigrants, provided they enter the country legally. On the other hand, we have 12 million illegal people in the US because we have been willing to hire them. 90% of the problem is our own fault.

As to those here who are seething with ill concealed hatred for the US, put your money where your mouth is. Boycott all American products, starting with your computer.

LindaJ, USA,

What are we to do, trust a stunningly incompetent administration to muck around further in Iraq? To allow another 12million illegas in to the country. Many of the "Chattering Class" seem to think that the Bush administration while having its flaws is, on balance, not so bad, that somehow they will eventually get it right. What folly!
After nearly five years of an utterly unnecessary war that has been completely mismanaged how can we trust them to do anything. This adminisrtration is beyond redemption. They have proven themselves untrustworthy or incompetant or both on so many fronts that the American people trust them with nothing, and shouldn't. Can you blame us. The best we can do now is just to hunker down and wait for 20 Jan 2009 and pray that we survive.
Grasping at straws? You bet! Straws are all we have.

Jim Walton, Washington, DC

remember viet-nam.. just a few advisors to begin with to stop a hand full of commies taking over a true democracy. run by
corrupt officials and army colonels. we can beat these fellows easy. 50.000 dead later and they won. i see the repeat now in iraq without the jungle.. this will stop if the americans bring in the draft for all men between 18--25 no get outs for any reason save bad health==unfit for service. hit the middle classes to get anything done.. so not just the poor and blacks have to join the forces

max bernstein, london, uk

I woke up this morning and looked to see that just over my back fence there was a squatters camp with 6-8 men living there. What attracted me was the grunting noise of a man with his pants down in the bushes relieving himself.

I live in Fairfax, a relatively affluent suburb of Washington DC. The Missus insisted I call the police. She is from a very nice European family and complained that nothing like this would happen in her family's part of the world.

So I really do not expect you people to quite understand. But if Bushmen from the Ngorongoro desert showed up in Knights bridge and started urinating in the street you might have a little sympathy for my viewpoint..

Her Grand mama is visiting and she was noticeably shocked..

John, Fairfax (McLean), Virginia

While we have to support the President Bush, or more the US soldiers on the ground in Iraq and Afghanistan;we have to be realistic and look at feasible solutions.Also e should not forget that Bush got involved in Afghanistan and Iraq after Al Qaida elements attacked the World Trade Center etc.The energy security is another issue and control over the middle-east and CIS states is also an issue here.
1- Iraq must be divided into a confederation of 3 sovereigns allowing space for the aspirations of the Sunni, Shia and Kurdish peoples; and may be a 3 systems 1 sovereign after stabilisation in 25 to 30 years and with military support from US,EU,India,Pakistan,PRC,etc.US bases are required permanently.
2- Similarly in Afghanistan.4 smaller sovereigns can be formed.And for that matter,Pakistan needs to be divided too into Punjab,Sindh,Baluchistan etc and developed into democratic,progressive islamic states e.g.like Malayesia. Sunnis will never accept a Shia leadership.

Sam Goodman, Toronto, Canada/Ontario

Please invite the worlds illegal immigrants to Britain. I'm sure your country will be much better off as a result.

Steve Freedman, San Francisco, Ca

McCain's candidacy was doomed before he signed onto the awful "Immigration Reform" bill....the years of playing to the media and the Democrats at the expense of his party, along with the McCain-Feingold "Campaign Finance" Law, have permanently alienated him from the GOP grassroots. He's simply not trusted by the people he needs to be nominated.

Mike, Illinois, US

Mr. Baker says: "America has absorbed waves and waves of immigrants through its history...Its remarkable gift for recreating itself has long been its most crucial economic talent."

I agree. Our diverse culture and history is something to embrace. But previous waves of immigrants were distinctly different from this one, in that they came here to BE Americans. They came through legal channels, learned the language, worked hard, and carved out for themselves a piece of the American dream. They did not have to abandon their culture or language to do this. (You can speak two languages, you know). I think our immigrant forefathers would be appalled at the number of people sneaking across the borders, mooching off public services, and claiming loyalty to the country they left behind while sneering at the Americans they live amongst. To call this a racist issue is an abusive cop out. I don't care if you're purple, so long as you come here wanting to be a legal American.

Donna, Mesa, Arizona

It is rare to see a fellow get so much so wrong. This article is written by someone who seems to know exactly zero about the immigration situation in the U.S., and perhaps even less about the now-deceased immigration bill that, as written, was an unmitigated disaster. The writer fails to recognize the exceptional duplicity of the Bush Administration with respect to the enforcement of existing immigration law in the U.S. It is completely obvious that this Administration had absolutely no intention of enforcing the provisions of the now-deceased law, just as it has no intention of enforcing existing law.

Finally, there is the simple lack of recognition that many of the so-called immigrants have no intention of staying: in this respect, they are substantially different from previous immigrants to the U.S.

Henry Bowman, St. Louis, Missouri (USA)

While I share your disgust at the shameful display of self protective politics in Washington, surprise surprise, I must say you could not be more in error in your assessment about the immigraion reform victory.

Rather than racist nativists we heartlanders simply could not abide any promises for enforcement when there absolutely no credible historical evidence it might be forthcoming.

Over 5000 illegals from "countrys of interest" have already walked through the pourous border. It takes tortured logic, or that of a coastal elitist, to equate security conciousness with racism - - but, as with the left, that slur is an ever so convenient substitute for actual argument.

Frank Byrne, Milwaukee, WI

Your article hinges on the belief that continued US presence in Iraq can, ultimately, make a positive difference to the nation. Americans, however, have come to accept that they cannot win in Iraq. Not now, not ever. Bush has tried to adjust to this by continously shifting the goal-posts that define what 'winning' actually is, whilst Presidential hopefulls pander to the new views of Americans by supporting a withdrawal of forces. And all the while Iraqis bleed and die for an ill concevied and poorly executed act of daylight imperialistic robbery masquerading as a mission to rid the world of Terror.

Americans have neither the stomache, nor the general inclination to see what they started through to its bloody conclusion. DId I just hear a Vietnam, anybody?

barristeronabreak, Yorkshire,

Why do these postings always become tribal? No society is perfect, lets all stop trying to defend or promote one country over another.

sonny, london,

"How paranoid little Napoleons took over America"

But this implies that American policy was previously being carried out in a thoughtful, considered manner? If that was the case then they wouldn't be in Iraq in the first place!

Owen, London, UK

Gerard, you continue to amaze me with your wild swings between "America right or wrong" and "Americans are all thick clods". This last piece puts you, apparently, on the swing back to the former.

So, having invaded a country on entirely false pretences, having lied to congress, the electorate and its allies, the American government now has "vital national interests" in Iraq? What could those be, I wonder?

Could it be that having the most active terrorist organizations fight their fight on someone else's soil is infinitely preferable to having to defend your own land - no matter how many Iraqis and others die in the process? (Such cravenness would certainly be of a piece with the excuses for starting the war.)

As for "Islamist extremists would seize on their victory to push their creed with ever more gusto." - the domino theory, Gerard? Really, is that discredited, antique excuse for a failed war the best you can conjure?

John A Blackley, Austin, TX, USA

Mr Dave Browning
Hour of need eh? I seem to remember that both Britain France and Germany as well as the rest of Europe was with the USA after 9/11. But invading Iraq had nothing to do with that issue. But, where were the brave Americans in 1939 at the fall of France to the German Juggernaut or in 1940 when Britain fought for survival? Waiting to see who was winning probably. You even let the Germans declare war on you first rather than help off your own bat. So don't give us that nonsense. As my father used to say of the USA "late for the last two wars but determined to be early for the next" France is probably the best friend you have in the advice it has given to the USA. "Don't invade Iraq it will be a mess and creat a space for AQ to congregate" but like some petulant teenager fuelled by testosterone the USA did what it wanted and made a mistake. You just can't put a wise head on young shoulders can you? Thanks for commenting. It's a pity you can't get debates in the USA?

Sammy Jenkins, London, UK

Re Mr Browning's comments, I'd like to point out that there is much of value in the "old world" and that we could quite happily do without new killing fields - he should not be wishing death and destruction on us.

Self interest alone should temper his wishes - a wider war in the middle east will disrupt / halt oil supplies and then, God forbid, he and 300 million other americans might actually have to cut down on the miles they drive in their polluting 4x4s.

Erik, Gatwick, UK

On immigration, it may be inaccurate to blame the American "heartland" for defeating the immigration bill. A majority of Americans would probably support a solution on immigration similar to the one recently defeated. Within the political parties, however, the crypto-racist idealogues of the far right and the neo-protectionist union bureaucrats of the far left that oppose it. No doubt, it was also opposed by businesses who exploit immigrants and drug smugglers who rely on lax border enforcement. The U.S. political parties are often controlled by their extremist wings, typically without regard for the middle ground supported by the "heartland." On immigration, both the Republican right wing and the Democratic left wing were in opposition even though the now-defeated bill probably represented the consensus among a majority of Americans. The middle ground, however, is not well represented in American politics.

Bob, Reston, Virginia

Once again Mr. Baker hits the nail on the head. It's disillusioning to see Congress chase its tail Iraq, immigration and - to add a couple more tedious isses to the mix - the Valerie Plame affair and the firing of US attorneys. It's clear the Congress isn't providing leadership but instead positioning itself for reelection.

Who wants to see our soldiers dying in Iraq and Afghanistan? Nobody but the enemy. One the other hand, who really wants to witness the consequences to the innocent citizens of both countries if our soldiers depart? Not me.

Kudos to McCain and Mr. Bush for sticking to what they believe is right. At least two people in Washington are exhibiting leadership. The rest are just self-serving, spineless demagogues.

DJ, West Chester, PA, USA

Dont forget in WWII the nation which spent most of its youth(20%), in the fighting and one which is NEVER credited by the USA, were the Russians .. all hail the communists.
As to Iraq, well staying and going both have strong adherents, I believe it may be time to allow the Arab nations to sort themselves out.. They are capable of living in peace and making compromise .. especially once they have had +their+ "world war" . Any nation wants peace once they have wasted men money and material on the futility we call war. Once they have tried it they wont shout so loud for it next time. Oil? well, lets do without.. great for Global warming! oh and CAFE should be increasing by 20% a year, despite detroit howling.

Scabrous Brit, london , UK

To promote the regulation of immigration is not nativist or racist. And the frustration felt by so many here is not so much with the invading hordes as it is with the opportunistic politicians who covet them as voters. Those politicians would throw away the tenuous cultural consensus that exists here for a few votes. Mr. Baker's commentary is normally cogent, however he has reached his own low with irresponsible use of epithets.

Mac, Hyannis , MA, US

I agree, Scott. It seems that more and more in the Western Democracies the rich and elite, the "aristocrats", the "nobility" believe that they know what's best for us stupid peasants.

The people seldom get a say on the issues that affect them directly, be it EU policies in Europe or the illegal alien flood in America.

F. Barnes, Thayer, Missouri

I found myself in agreement with Mr. Baker, which is why I st up a doctors appointment for early next week.
ALL of America's immigration laws in the past have been racist in nature. Every single one. The one that went down in flames was no different.
The rational approach to immigration in America would be to remove the issue from government hands.
Make immigration an economic issue and let private enterprise deal with it. If you have a job waiting in America, you can come. If not you can't. Let employment agencies do the screening, hiring and associated paperwork. This would take the passion of day to day politics out, increase national security and employment security for American workers. Turn a profit at the same time.
What could be more American then that?

john Samford, Memphis,

I'm wondering: When the European settlers that crossed the Atlantic to colonize America, and the native population resisted whether in the form of simply moving to an area that the white man hadn't reached yet, to all out blood thirsty war, were those native Americans racist in their defence of their land? No you say? Then why are the descendants of those Europen settlers racist when THEY want to resist their land from being taken over? You can't have it both ways. Either we are racist wanting to keep what is now ours,...and so were the Native Americans, or they weren't and neither are we. Over the history of the world, lands have exchanged hands almost hundreds of times, in either large or small conflicts, the winner usually being the stronger of the combatants. If the Mexicans want to take America from us, they can have it if we allow it to happen. But it is also true that resisting such a takeover is natural and right, just as the "Indians" did before WE took it from them.

Michael Fleming, Boxborough, Mass/ USA

"Spoken like someone whose mainland has never been subjected to sustained attack during a war."

Tony Volpe & Homer, sounds like my comment about Europeans prefering to die begging on their knees, stung a bit. It should.

True. Many Europeans throughout history have demonstrated America's preference to "die on their feet." That should be no surprise, because we learned it from our European ancestors dating back to Kelts, Romans, Huns, Spartans and Norseman. And now Sun Tzu as well. Europe today though, does not match the magnificence of its history. They have become effete in protection of their cultures and homelands. Why did Americans have to lead in Bosnia. Why not handle it all yourselves? Yes, we will never likely be attacked on our homeland, again. Historically we were, as were many of our parents or grandparents or great grandparents in their countries of origin. That is because we have a Second Ammenment: the right to keep and bear arms. You don't.

Mark W Scott, Lake Mohawk, Sparta, New Jersey, USA

Typical redcoat arrogance. "We're leaving but we think you should stay and endure the consequences of our joint mis-adventure.

ed little, Pittsburgh, USA

Using the logic and analysis that current US politicians / presidential candidates use to analyze the Iraqi war effort, that fellow who appears on the US penny and whose memorial stands on the banks of the Potomac in Washington DC should have been impeached at the beginning of the US civil war for arresting the entire Maryland Assembly to keep them from voting for seccesion from the Union. It was clearly unconstitutional, yet it avoided the unimaginable result of having the nation's capital within the confederacy, which would have no doubt changed the course of history. That war was brutal and messy, as were the World Wars. Forecasters in 1863 or 1916 or during the winter of 1944, could have easily declared that the ultimate victors were doomed to defeat. Perserverance, even in the face of horrific battle losses, is what brought us to the prosperity we enjoy today. Indifference to what happens after a withdrawal from Iraq only shows ignorance of history & how today's world works.

Robert, New York, NY

The ineptitude dodge again. But the ideology behind the neoconservative project was fatally flawed and the project doomed from the beginning.

Maybe Mr Baker should read some British history...no, not the heroic WWII stuff so beloved by the neos but the traumatic, tawdry, tragic history of the English in Ireland. Occupation is never much loved by the occupied.

Anyway, it's too late now. Poor Iraq! All those suffering, bombed, murdered people! How could you do it, Mr Baker? How could you do it?

Mary Shelley, London, UK

The reality is the U.S. Army can't sustain the current level of operations much longer. Is Mr. Baker's own country doing all it can do with it's soon to be drawn down 5,000?
How would Mr. Baker like it if there were 12 million illegal immigrants, mostly Latinos, in England? Another reality is most of them don't consider themselves immigrants; they consider themselves Mexicans.

J., Austin, Texas

You indicate McCain's view of the Iraq War has something to do with his drop in the polls - it has little to do with it. He is the republican party equivalent of Kipling's 'Cat Who Walks by Himself'. When he chose to walk by himself on immigrant amnesty - away from the party base - he reminded the base of his previous departures from the fold. As a result - like the cat in Kipling's story he gets rejected by man and dog alike.

Harvey, Minnesota, USA

What the White House and the war apologists have failed to point out is the Surge is being undertaken to prop up a government that is in fact pro-Iranian. The hawks argue that if the American and allied forces fail, the world becomes more dangerous. However, if they succeed, Iran gains a satellite. I fail to see how this makes the deaths of 3,898 coalition troops and countless Iraqis "worthwhile."

Jeff Myhre, New York City, USA

John from Egremont, islam awaits you, I'm sure you will be much happier is a muslim country living under sharia law. Ooops, wait a minute England is almost there!

Max, Limerick, Ireland

Why do Brits not speak german today?

Jess Phillips, Albany, Texas

Sounds as if our so-called British friends are a tad testy. Once a great empire, now such a little speck in the scheme of it all. It is so nice to see how your liberal multi-cultural socitey has truly curtailed hatred towards western values. You are so blind, but anyway, please feel free to continue to hate the country that every wants to live in, despite their jealously and language of hatred. By the way, please get measured for a prayer rug.

Brian, Chicago, IL

Yes, Americans kill each other with guns and whatever tool is available. Of course, so do the British. I hear you are now trying to ban knives since they are your substitute for guns. American are armed and free and that makes us citizens. You are disarmed and not so free, which makes you subjects. I will keep my guns, thank you. The US health care system is still the best in the world. Explain to me why an English patient is less likely to see a specialist than his pet dog. Finally, you have allowed people to immigrate to Britain who want to enslave you under Sharia Law and then worry about offending them with words. Do not count on Americans to bail you out this time. Grow some stones.

Mike J, Austin, Texas

Democracy typically get is wrong in the short term, realizes its mistake and corrects itself to do the right thing. Let's have a little faith in ourselves. We won't find a solution to the Iraq war until the next administration (since this one can't do anything as it has lost of its political capital). It seems to me that there are options beyond 1) stay and 2) leave. I think we need to work hard to develop an international police force (which neeeds to include an Arab Muslim contingent) to oversee the very slow transition to a stable form of government in Iraq.

On the immigration front, I can't help but notice how people complain about immigrants using social services, but are happy to pay low prices for all the things the immigrants provide (agriculture, gardening, the list goes on). As for the culture invasion: How often do you order out Kung Pao Chicken or Pizza? Amazing how those have become American foods!

David, New York, NY

The real reason the American 'heartland' didn't support the immigration bill is because they do not trust the government to strengthen border security. Too many times we have granted amnesty to illegals with the promise that it will be the last amnesty and that the border would be secured. Most Americans respect Latinos work ethic and family values but want them to come here in an orderly fashion and assimilate into American society.

Fred B., Kansas City, Missouri, USA

Why is it that proponents of the Amnesty, er, Immigration Bill always label opponents as anti-immigrant? Get it right: we are anti-ILLEGAL-immigrant! The so-called enforcement provisions were nothing more than window-dressing around an amnesty for illegal aliens, desired by Democrats who want votes and Republicans who want cheap labor for their business interests. Why on Earth should we support a law promising such an exchange -- amnesty for border security -- when we have an executive branch that has shown little more than token enforcement of EXISTING laws? It's just 1986 all over again. I would be willing to talk about the amnesty provisions, AFTER the security provisions have been implemented and demonstrably enforced. Until then... forget it.

James Bradley, Charleston, SC, USA

"The bottom line is you started the war so finish it and dont whine to the British or anyone else for that matter about the position you find yourself in."

I, for one, wish we had taken this attitude with the UK in 1917 and 1941. After all, you are whining about a very minor war (a predictable end result of a policy your PM supported wholeheartedly before Bush was even in office BTW) compared to the world wars you all helped drag us into. As for "national contrition" I suggest isolationism. Let's all relax and enjoy our beautiful country while our betters in Europe take the lead in dealing with the Middle East, Islamic terrorism, a surging China and a resurgent Russia. And don't worry, Europe, we in the US will be right behind you - 3,000 miles behind you.

Dean, Washington, DC

I agree that politics in this country has become absurd. However, don't confuse the political games played by our politicians with the will of Americans.

The only things that define a country are its borders, language and culture. If you have a problem with that, we'll gladly send the 12 million Mexicans over to England. Maybe you can let 12 million more muslims into your country since you're so welcoming of illegal aliens. Most of us are in agreement with legal immigration, but not with an invasion. Our phylosophy is simple...If you want to come in, knock first. If you don't then you're not welcome. That's how we feel. Anyone who doesn't agree with that can shove it where the sun don't shine.

I consider the UK and Australia our closest allies in this world, so my comments are directed at the writer and not the fine citizens of those countries.

Eric , Winter Garden, USA/Florida

All so typical of the left wing.

Diagree with them and you're a "nativist," and a "racist," who of course is "hysteria(cal)," a "(l)ittle Napoleon" who "strutted and howled... on TV and talk radio" and whose exercise of political rights is "ugly as it was absurd."

Contrary to the hyperventilation Americans legally admit more immigrants every year than the United Kingdom (something Comorade Barker ignores).

The overwhelming majority of Americas do oppose illegal aliens in the country, and do believe that employers should only hire those that are legally in the United States.

Over 600,000 illegal aliens currently under court order for deportation would have been allowed to remain under Kennedy-McCain.

Carl H, Tucson, Arizona

Up to now, I've been a bit ashamed to be an American because of the failed Bush Presidency. But because of the 2 Americans commenting above me, I'm no longer a *bit* ashamed, I'm totally ashamed to be an American. The other 2 commentors make me ashamed to be a human being.

Europe has become a large group of chickenhearted apologists for any minority group with explosives, I once thought Britain was above that, but it's no better. It and Europe have caved in to the threats and blackmail of butchers.

I felt at least that my country, once a place of hope for those less fortunate and in need of help, would do what was needed to help the Iraqi people achieve some sembalence of normality since we were the major cause of the situation they are now in. I was wrong....Americans have become totally a nation of greedy, what can you do for me and to hell with all that helping the downtrodden stuff, instant gratification morons.

McCain was our last hope as a people.

Joshua, Oxford, UK

In Mark Scott's remark from Sparta, New Jersey, that Europeans would rather "beg for mercy on their knees," in matters of war policy, we see yet another ugly American slur - an unforgivable insult to the hundreds of thousands of my parent's generation who gave their lives to defeat tyranny in WW2. It disgusts me that I can not read the comments section of a British online newspaper without coming across these grotesque and insulting abuses of common sense and decency vomited out by arrogant, ignorant American bigots!

If Mark Scott were half the man he thinks he is, he would feel shame and repentance, but I doubt that he will. As Douglas Alexander said today in Washington, 'A nation's greatness should be measured in what it can build rather than what it can destroy.' This is a lesson that people such as Mr Scott of Sparta should take to heart.

Tony Volpe, Newcastle upon Tyne, UK

It was truly stunning to read such an accurate and honest analysis of the war in Iraq from a European columnist. It seems as though all the members of the Democrat party in America are either totally blind to the consequences of surrender to the Islamic terrorists or are simply mouthing the words of their financial backers. Regardless of their motivation, the outcome will be the same; surrender and an exponential emboldening of the Islamic terrorists. The reasons for America's difficulties in Iraq all come from within; a press which does nothing but provide aid, encouragement and intelligence to the enemy while demoralizing the American soldiers and citizens, a political party whose sole goal is the accummulation of political power at the cost American lives and the inexplicable desire of the political and media classes to fight a war without hurting anyone's feelings. There is but one way to win and that is to totally dominate the opponent as was done in World War II.

Andy Foster, Charlotte, North Carolina

Mr. Baker,
It is patentely obvious that you are out of touch with Americans and the problems that we are facing. The mass influx of illegal immigration is straining our resources . The gangs and other criminals are literally taking over neighboorhoods all over the cities in the border states. Calling the citizens natavists is truly a cop out. Yes we can absorb immigrants but, why shouldn't we be allowed to control borders and decide which immigrants will be allowed in? This is not a right or left issue, this is about controlling our borders and enforcing our laws. Why shouldn't an immigrant be expected to follow the same laws that citizens are? Did you know that illegal immigrants are not punished for breaking laws that citizens would be fined or jailed for? Try being a victim of multiple crimes and watching those who commit the crimes go unpunished. We no longer have any faith in our government or our leaders either Democrat or Republican. Try walking in our shoes for awhile.

Max, Bellaire, Texas

True: there were plenty of europeans in the 1st Gulf War, plenty of them in Afghanistan (not necessarily as effective, but at least they turned up) and far too many in the second Gulf War. And Mr. Browning from Texas forgets that we waited for the US to stand by its friends etc etc until 1941. My, what convictions....

d'argent, hgfdsds,

The world just needs to hold on for about 18 more months, which is a lot to ask for a few and not enough for many. But I feel sure Bush will allow us to do just that. I am not sure if Bush actually believes the words that come out of his mouth. I know that I sure don't, but I do believe that despite the conditions in Iraq, he will never pull out. He has already said that the next President will have to finish the war in Iraq, which as an American, I am glad to say, 'Thank God'. I do not trust him anymore to successfully get troops out of Iraq than he did to get them in. Whoever the poor soul is next, will be much more capable...whoever it is.

Jason, Dallas, Texas / USA

Mr Baker nails it exactly. Thanks for the great piece about the new American nativism (a long strain that goes back to the anti-Irish Catholic riots in the 1840s) and most importantly on Iraq. Americans of intelligence and reason agree entirely with Mr. Baker. Unfortunately the darker sides of American politics are showing on both issues--xenophobia on one hand and putting partisan politics before the nation's interest by retreating from a fight that is very winnable.

Great job.

Jim, Carlisle, USA, PA

Reasonable people can disagree with the decision to topple Saddam Hussein's regime. Frankly, I think the job should have been done thoroughly in 1991 and not left to fester for 12 years while Hussein enriched himself, starved his country, and fostered violent Islamic extremism. However, having invaded to topple him on the basis of near universally accepted intelligence that turned out to be wrong - it would be equally wrong to abandon the Iraqi people to Al Qaeda and sectarian genocide.

As for illegal immigration in the USA - there's nothing racist about rejecting a bill that promised more than it could deliver to people burned several times in the past. Prove to Americans that border security has improved, and then we can talk about absorbing the people who violated our laws. In the meantime, we shouldn't let them benefit ahead of immigrants who have met all the hurdles to be here legally. It's irrelevant whether the illegal immigrants are from Mexico, Ireland, or China.

Jill, Pittsburgh, PA, USA

"As far as war policy, unlike Europeans, Americans prefer to die on their feet than beg for mercy on their knees.

Mark W Scott, Lake Mohawk, Sparta, New Jersey, USA"

Spoken like someone whose mainland has never been subjected to sustained attack during a war. Violent military action for some of you in the US seems to be something served up in digestible chunks by Fox News in between items on Paris Hilton.

You may recall that large numbers of European/Commonwealth soldiers -and European civilians- died alongside your boys in WWII (you didn't win it all on your own whatever Hollywood says) and the continent was devastated. Perhaps that's one reason why Europeans are more circumspect about killing and being killed.

Homer, London,

how did all the legal immigrants manage to get here? I'll ask it again...how did all the LEGAL immigrants....the ones who make up the existing mosaic....the LEGAL immigrants....how oh how on earth id they manage the impossible task of becoming citizens?

well that's what immigrants have to continue to do, obey our laws.

omar snarkly, garglesville, usa/montana

Mr Baker like our political elites makes no effort to conceal his contempt and loathing for the electorate. Evidently he did not read the immigration reform bill. Because American citizens live with and understand the consequences of unchecked illegal immigration, we carefully reviewed the details of the bill.
This was terrible legislation which a small group of senators attempted to 'jam through' without adhering to the proper, normal deliberative process. After decades of promises and inaction on the part of gov't, we finally stood up and said "Enough! Do it properly or set it aside for now." We will continue to do so no matter how much scorn is thrown at us.
In the future I doubt that I will bother to read Mr. Baker's work. Such a cursory, shallow analysis of the immigration debate leads me to think that his opinions cannot be seriously considered.

BHG, Heartland, USA,

How absolutely strange it is for foreigners to be commenting on the particulars of the U.S. electorate, even to the point of supporting certain Senators such as John McCain, when it simply impossible for a Euro, Kiwi, or Aussie to come within a light year of having a clue about what is ACTUALLY going on in America, or to know anything much at all about our presidential candidates and political class. I speak of the typical poster here, not of Gerard Baker, although to a lesser degree this holds to him, as well. The Euro and foreign press, indeed the press from every nation, is simply far too inaccurate to reach many conclusions about a very complex society in which you do not live, especially when the foreign press is nursing its bigotries and pursuing agenda rather than trying to portray things accurately. The fact that so many use the term 'neoconservative' is illustration of this: It is a dead term that really has no meaning -- to use it indicates ignorance, not insight. It's the so

Robert, Sacramento, California

In response to the first two comments: While I am sympathetic to bashing President Bush for his incompetence and stubbornness, I am not sympathetic to the naked hatred for Americans. Even if you believe that the war always was and has been about oil, the Americans who supported the invasion did not. Those Americans who supported the war were willing to send their sons and daughters into danger in the belief that they were freeing an oppressed people. My friends and family in Iraq are there, fighting and dying, because they believe that it would be morally irresponsible and cowardly to let Iraqis be slaughtered when we bear the responsibility of toppling their government in the first place. Thousands of Americans have given lives and limb for a cause they believed would help others. Even if you do believe it's naive, it is far from evil.

Joe Hutchings, Birmingham, Alabama

Disregarding your comments on the immigration debate, i agree with most of what you say about Iraq, but I am struck by your assumption that it is the U.S. that is having trouble there. It is the entire western world that has a problem, and if we fail it is a shame for Europe also. Although we may give in too quickly, most of Europe never seriously tried to do its part. And if we decide to pull out too soon, it will only be long after our allies have cut back in the little help we recieved. We will know that we did our share to sacrifice for this cause, the shame belongs to most of Europe that did nothing or hampered us.

ken machynia, itasca, u.s.a. il.

Mr. Keen,

Good column. As an American I would ask you if the cause in Iraq is so noble, why, then, is the UK withdrawing? Shouldn't they be doing their own "surge" to support freedom?

Jim Hile, Fair Lawn, NJ, USA

David.
Perhaps you should lie down for awhile.

Richard, London,

I am one of the "nativist" and "racist" American heartland denizens that you crassly and unfairly accuse of cultural hysteria and xenophobia. Nothing could be farther from the truth. As a grandson of Italian and Irish immigrants, I assure you that nothing racist informs my bitter oppostition to the late immigration bill.
We have a national executive and legislature who are too self interested in new voters and/or cheap laborers to deal with the basic question of the rule of law.
When we forgotten men and women watch the national "leaders" scoff at our belief in that basic principle, we do have to rise up to remind them that they are not the autonomous elites they think they are, but are, despite their megalomania, the representatives of the people who need to at least show some minimal respect for the law that we ourselves pledge to respect and uphold.
I suggest you come here and "immerse" yourself in our counry before you assume to know what is in our hearts and souls

James R. Brown, Omaha, Nebraska

Your assessment of what's going on in my country regarding Iraq is spot on. Most Americans are well aware of the points you made and its' good to know our principle ally has a grip on the situation as well.

As to our immigration policy and law, allow me to suggest you stick to criticisng the same about your own country and leave us out.

We open our doors to everyone that comes to our country legally and welcome them. Insisting that the flood of people coming to our country illegally be stopped and something done about those already here illegaly is not "nativist" or "racist". It is about upholding the rule of law, insuring our continued national sovreignty, and insuring national security. I'm surprised someone from across the pond who "gets" the Iraq issue doesn't grasp the national sovreignty one as well.

Lee, Atlanta GA, USA

You are very right about Iraq, but very wrong about our immigration debate. The very few racist voices were a small part of the groundswell opposing that bill. The problem is that Americans no longer trust our own government. The minimal border security measures promised in the failed bill (which pale next to those around Europe) were promised in 1965 and 1986 to offset wiping the slate clean for huge numbers of people who broke the law to get here. This only made it more difficult for those who try to emigrate via legitimate channels. We've captured hordes sneaking in who hail from terrorist states, but those who are supposed to protect us at the borders acknowledge that they fail far more often than they succeed. Americans told our leaders to secure the borders, and when that is complete, we'll be happy to talk about the millions here seeking freedom and prosperity.

Rev. Daniel J. Lemke, Ashley, USA / Ohio

Last year I spent part of my summer holiday from University working as a supervisor for Camp America in the Mid West; it was great and I had the time of my life meeting these kids from such disparate backgrounds be they Mexican, Chinese, or WASP. Each and every one of them by and large got on fine however when it came for them to be picked up by their parents we never ceased to be amazed by how small minded and insular these supposed adults often were; some of whom did not even realise the UK used pound sterling rather than the dollar.

If the UK and US forces left Iraq it would clearly be a disaster - there should be a feeling that we got them in this mess so we surely should help them out of it rather than bleating on about how much you hate the rest of the word away from your doorstep.

I appreciate D Browning's comments are not indicative of most sane minded Americans but it still worries me that there can be people like that out there.

Jake Bronson, London, UK

I just wanted to add a brief comment in relation wIth that fear related to the "mexicatization" of the US.
I think that the US is a great country, I ve being living there for a while as an student and also as a profesional , and I have found it incredible but most of the people when they talk about inmigration they usually forget that nearly half of the country has strong spanish roots and heritage.
You just have to read a little bit about US history to know that names of states like Colorado, Texas (Tejas), New Mexico. or cities like San Francisco, Sacramento, San Antonio, Toledo are not coming for nowhere. In fact ,most of those territories were ripped off from Mexico in several agresive wars. I am not saying that the borders should be revised, that would be ridiculous but to present the Spanish and Mexican heritage as something alien to the History of thisgreat and admirable country is totally absurd
perhaps that's the real problem

gonzalo, Madrid, Spain

Gerard Baker describes Americans as 'little Napoleons' and racist 'nativists' for opposing the immigration bill. I wonder what would be the reaction in the UK if 1 million algerians showed up on the UK's southern coast every year, half caught and half disappearing into the huge 3 million strong illegal algerian ghettos of London and Birmingham?

Would it be nativist to want to stop this trend? Would it be napoleonic to insist that the influx be stopped before the 3 millions be legalized?

Mr. Baker needs to go to fewer DC cocktail parties and go visit the nation that he purports to report on.

bill reeves, st. louis, Missouri, USA

John of Egremont is as numerically challenged regarding American voters as is Gerard Baker factually challenged on US immigration policy.

In addition to besting John Kerry in electoral votes, Bush beat Kerry by garnering 62M popular votes to John Kerry's 59M votes. While I don't know for certain how math percentages are taught in the UK, how John of Egremont can state that Bush was elected with only 5% of the popular vote is beyond comprehension.

With regard to immigration policy, yes, most American believe in building a very high wall on borders, but with a very wide gate. We welcome "legal" immigrants from everywhere, but do not believe in rewarding those who have broken our laws and depressed the national culture, at the expense of the hundreds of thousands who are waiting patienty in line to enter legally and become Americans.

As far as war policy, unlike Europeans, Americans prefer to die on their feet than beg for mercy on their knees.

Mark W Scott, Lake Mohawk, Sparta, New Jersey, USA

May I just remind the gentleman from Dallas that France, as well as a number of European countries participated in the first Gulf war and are still present in Afghanistan. 2 out of 3 isnt too bad surely.

Thomas , London,

I expect that McCain's candidacy is at an end. I think it would be a great thing if he were to drop out of the race and spend the rest of his Senate term reviving some version of the immigration Bill.

We could have a much better immigration debate if he could persuade some in the Senate to stand up to the radio talk-show far-right. It might indeed cost a seat or two, but a sensible immigration Bill would be a wonderful legacy and a godsend to US domestic policy and relations with Mexico.

The trouble with immigration today is that the anti-immigrant far-right think they have an issue, and care enough about it to be engaged, while sensible folks see there really is no issue, but they don't care enough to fight. McCain could mobilize the moderate middle, but only if he concentrates on getting that job done. If he stays in the race he will end up achieving nothing.

jon livesey, Sunnyvale, CA/US

It will be a loss to the world if Mr McCain, a man of unimpeachable integrity, courage and sound judgement were lost to the presidency.

A lesser man would have weighed his positions more carefully and twisted and turned but Mr McCain has had the courage of his convictions and will pay the price.

After the disastrous Bush presidencies the world needs a man of honour and sense, but we are most likely to end up with another career pol - hopefully a smart one, but still a rodent of dubious morality.

A sad commentary on the way the world is.

cuffleyburgers, lucca,

McCain is an absurd anachronism whose campaign is quite desrvedly going down in flames. gBeing a war hero does not neccesarily lead to the right conclusions in other matters.

oldasiahand, Guildford, UK

Your article applies equally to the UK, so there shouldn't be an early pull out of our troops. I can't understand why people continue to blame it all on neocons, and Bush and Blair. If anyone was to research the lead up to all of this it is easy to find that Clinton planned to invade Iraq, but only held off because of the last Palestinian intifada, and the potential reaction of the Arab "street". With hindsight it wouldn't have made any difference to the Arab "street", but don't blame Bush and Blair, for something they continued with that others found expedient not to do.

Jim D, Norwich, UK

The revolt against the immigration bill was true democracy in action. The people voiced their anger and stopped in the 11th hour the government trying to railroad their commercial interest over the cultural impact of massive immigration. To simply class them as right wingers and Napoleons shows the narrow mindedness of this journalist. Perhaps talk radio is the voice of the average person and politicians should talk note.

Carl, Leeds, England

it's very simple. america, like britain, has an obligation to stay and try to help sort out the mess we created (over more than 50 years, it has to be said). it should not be left to the electorate to decide that enough is enough. they should have thought about it earlier. and they should still be thinking about a far wider resolution for the region than simply military efforts in iraq. we will solve nothing by being half-hearted.

jem, london, uk

I do so agree with Mr Baker. It’s intensely irritating when the majority of the people go against the wishes of their leaders, and indeed one of the problems with democracy is that it gives lots of ill-informed upstarts the opportunity to say what they think and to insist that their views are listened to. What is needed is the smack of firm autocratic leadership, perhaps from a little Napoleon equipped with views identical to those of Mr Baker.

John Sargent, Trieste, Italy

Iraq is just the begining, the US leaving will most likely only start the end of all the muslim countries as we know them! Oh, and millions dead, worldwide!
This so called war on terrorrism, is a war on an ideology, that intends to drag us all down the spiral of Iraq! America should have 600 thousand troops in this nighmare, and than maybe, in a few years provided they also win in afganistan and keep the rest at bay, may we have avoided the Real World War!

Jondi, London,

The reality is that the US cannot pacify Iraq.

If the US pulls out, and Iran, Turkey and Saudi Arabia move in to fill the power vacuum the position may well be better. Iran, Turkey and the Saudis would doubtless use the methods of Saddam Hussein to put down the insurgency and eliminate Al Qaeda. A regional solution where the regional powers carve up Iraq may be the best solution: the Iraqis are clearly incapable of governing themselves.

The US worries that if this occurs it will lose control of oil supplies but it will not be in Iran or Saudi Arabia's interest to shut down supply; they will need the oil revenues to fund their forces in Iraq.

A straight out fight between Sunnis and Shia in Iraq could be the best thing for the world: the Muslims would finally deal with their issues once and for all with the West standing on the sidelines instead of in the crossfire.

Simon TPK, Melbourne, Australia

I would add two more adjectives to Mr. Stubbs's pair--patronizing and arrogant. We have between 12-20 million illegals in the U.S. How would the British feel if they had proportionately that many--say 2-3 million, Mr. Baker?

I noticed an article in an English newspaper during my recent visit to the UK (May) underlining the fact that one has to prove he/she is an English citizen to work in your country, with I'm sure, some exceptions.

The U.S. government deceived the citizenry with the last big immigration bill in 1986, has not enforced the existing laws since then, and now wanted to pass another broad piece of legislation that most American citizens believe would not be enforced, financed, taken seriously, etc. It would simply have encouraged more illegal immigration.

I believe you know all this. The question is why you chose such an imbalanced angle of analysis. Some of your comments were simply insulting.

P. M. Robinson, Vienna, USA, Virginia

Spot on. America will likely withdraw from Iraq too soon and pay the consequences soon after. Senator McCain is indeed the only presidential candidate talking sense about Iraq, but he lacks the charisma and leadership to be elected even if he was not advocating such an unpopular policy. The other current candidates are drearily lightweight on foreign policy, but one of them is going to get the job unless a heavyweight finally steps into the ring.
The situation in Iraq is dire but this was to be expected after a war. There are easy wars, but there are no easy peaces after them. The current US policy is the correct one. The US must maintain an armed presence in the country while allowing the build up of an Iraqi army and police force that can maintain security.
Perhaps, and it is a very outside bet, Americans will see the fruits of the policy before Bush has to step down. The clock is against him.

paddy, dumfries, uk

I think this is a very sharp analysis and I agree with it. I am equally sure that the US will pull out of Iraq by this time next year, leaving a bloodbath behind it. This will inevitably send the whole region into a conflagration and we can look forward to a doubling, if not tripling in oil prices as a consequence. Following the law of unintended consequences, this may be just what the world needs to adopt alternatives to using oil - and there are plenty perfectly technical viable ones which are carbon zero, as any Portuguese (wave energy), New Zealand (geothermal) or German (concentrated solar power) electricity company will tell you.

Steve, Wiltshire,

The mistake George Bush made was in not getting out of Iraq after overthrowing the regime of Saddam Hussain. The concept of establishing a democracy in its place was and is a dream and a nightmare. Nowhere in the Muslim countries of the Middle East does a genuine democracy exist, except in Turkey where it is challenged by an increasingly powerful Muslim party.
George Bush should have allowed the Iraqis to determine their future after Saddam Hussain.
Unfortunately, the only course now remaining to him is a humiliating retreat, and the reputation of one of the few US presidents who is a loser. Unfortunate because he had the guts to take a decision vital to the fight against Islamic fundamentalism- even if Saddam himself was not a Islamic zealot but merely a sadistic and despotic dictator. After US forces leave Iraq no doubt there will be a period of anarchy- but eventually things will settle down.

V L Rao, Bangalore, India

I totally disagree with your Little Napoleon comment. Many people in the US see current levels of immigrations as an invasion that is talking away their language and culture day by day. The USA was founded on immigration but Australia was founded as a penal colony. That is history and has very little todo with the modern world. Times have moved on and no country and take uncontrolled high levels of low skilled immigration without suffering. Take a look at the UK and see our housing shortages and overcrowded schools and hospitals.

Steve, London, England

I took you seriously until you got to wholly unfair analysis of the (illegal) immigrantion bill. I must be a racist or a nativist. Hmmm.

Well, since we're tossing around accusations, you'd wouldn't have been trying to get in on that citizenship thing, would you?

Fernandez, San Francisco, California

The central tenet of neo-conservatism of promoting democracy round the world that you mention, illustrates the contradictory nature of American society. This neo-conservative tenet is actually to avoid the promotion of democracy in America. Obviously the notion of promoting democracy by war is absurd. I think Americans can usefully reflect at this point on the fact that they can’t go on taking immigrants for ever. What are they going to do then? In a similar fashion, they can’t sensibly go on waging war for ever. What will they do then? They can postpone the answers to these types of problem, but perhaps Iraq illustrates the dilemma if they do. Imagine Senator McCain in charge of these problems.

Henry Percy, London, UK

I can't think of any reason, off hand, for remaining in Iraq. The whole enter[rise was justified on the basis of reasons, all of which were known to be fabrications at the time, it involved a significant breach of international law (ask Kofi Annan).

Getting out is only half the struggle. Some sort of national contrition will also be required if the rest of the world are ever to see the US as benign ever again.

John Reid, Wellington, New Zealand

Could you be more condescending and contemptuous of the electorate?
It sounds like you've got sour grapes because the people have finally worked out that neoconservatism is a dangerous cult that needs to be expunged from the Republican Party for it to survive.
Did you consider that many conservatives who opposed the immigration bill may have been skeptical because the last time immigration enforcement was promised it failed absymally? Instead you play the Bush card and label opponents as sub human.
The problem is that the elites tell us that they know best but they don't keep their promises and continue to waste lives and treasure without sacrificing anything themselves.

Scott Stubbs, Sydney, Australia

howls of protest from the heartland because anyone employing an illegal, after illegals made legal, becomes a felon whether knowing or not, under the defeated bill.

okieflood, grant, oklahoma