The war against Iraq brings to mind a current popular song by Santana called ' Game of Love . The song is about how love developed from "a little bit of this" and "a little bit of that", and it ends with: "and it's all in this game of love".

This conflict is just like that, a little bit of this and a little bit of that, and it's all in this game of war.

Each of the reasons propounded by the US and its allies in its justification of war, frankly cannot stand by itself. But if you say it all together at the same time you may be convinced. The arguments are sadly flawed and is just an illusion that some would like to believe - just like the love-sick girl in the song.

Let's start with reason o­ne: Saddam as a cruel dictator and kills his own. He may have been o­ne but unless the people are dropping like flies and there is a humanitarian crisis developing in Iraq, o­ne cannot justify going to war to remove him. Besides, he will say that it is UN sanctions that are causing his people to suffer.

The second reason - Iraqi freedom - is hogwash to me as I believe there are at least as many people in Iraq who want to maintain the status quo as there are those who want him removed.

Next, Saddam has weapons of mass destruction and will use it o­n the US and its allies. Having such weapons is not wrong per se as many countries have such capabilities now, but it is the intended use of these weapons that worry the US most.

Saddam may have made his dislike of the US and her allies plain, but does he have aggressive intentions? Unless the US has taken to mind reading, the most o­ne can safely conclude is that there is more than an even chance that he will use it. But so too will North Korea and Iran - from the so-called 'Axis-of-Evil'.

Is this assertion enough to go to war over? Will removing these 'threats' in this manner make the world a safer and more predictable place? It is okay if you are playing chess, but here you are gambling with soldiers' lives, civilian lives, and a whole lot of money.

Finally, the reason that Saddam will sell his weapons to terrorists who in turn will use it o­n the US and her allies. To me this is the most compelling of all reasons to rid Saddam of his weapons, for it is a coward's way of letting others do your bidding and not have it traced back to you. But then again, you have the weapons inspectors doing their work and they should have been given time to complete their work. If this had failed and Saddam has weapons unaccounted for, o­nly then would a war be justified. That too, o­ne is again playing the clairvoyant about his 'bad' intentions.

To my mind there are other motives for this war and Blair is about to find out all about it real soon when he starts asking Bush tough questions o­n the road ahead for a post-war Iraq and Middle East.