I feel sorry for Bill Dillon who actually believes that the US-led war against Iraq is to right the wrongs of the 9/11 tragedy and to prevent more of such tragedies. The fact is that this war against Iraq has actually been planned four years before the horrible terrorist act in the US. I refer Mr Dillon to Robert Fisk's article .

To be fair to US President George W Bush, the Iraq "solution" as espoused by the "Project for the New America Century" initially did not gain purchase with him. It was o­nly after the 9/11 that a frantic US president, leader of the most powerful nation in the world, with multiple intelligence services and the mightiest military machine that could theoretically reach into every recess and nook o­n this earth, was at a loss to account to more than 250 million Americans for this terrorist act.

The 'pound of flesh' had to be called for. Osama bin Laden was picked as the culprit even though this man, not known for his humility or shyness in announcing his terrorist acts, disclaimed any involvement in the suicide attacks of 9/11.

Osama was residing in Afghanistan, the country for which he was trained by the US government to fight against the then USSR and its ally, the Northern Alliance. Another US ally in the Afghanistan war, the Taliban, governed the country after the Soviet and the Northern Alliance were defeated. They had to be the 'collateral damage' for daring to demand evidence of Osama's involvement before handing him over to the US. Damn cheeky of the Taliban to insist o­n the western due process of law!

In fact the adverse relationship with the Taliban went well for Bush. This was the opportunity for him to demonstrate to the American public that no o­ne messes around with the mightiest nation o­n earth, not while George W Bush is the president, no sirree!

As the Americans would phrase it: It's kick-ass time! Bang, pow, zap ...the Taliban was gone did anyone ever doubt that was to be the case, a primitive medieval band of clerics against a modern superpower like the US?

The former foe, the Northern Alliance, a band of murderous warlords whose bands of brigands raped, pillaged and killed the Afghans, was put back in place. To the US, they are the good guys now.

But the elusive Osama did a disappearing act. This was not co-operative; in fact this was not good. How could the mighty US fail to bring to justice the alleged culprit, after announcing to the Americans that he was public enemy No 1?

Enter (or re-enter) the 'Project for the New America Century'. The US crosshair conveniently shifted to Saddam. Everything fell into place again. The 'momentum' for American revenge can be maintained (by some creative linking of Saddam and Osama doesn't matter if these two are the worst of enemies), thus protecting the president's accountability and credibility. What's more, there is oil as a bonus as Iraq sits o­n the second largest reserves in the world.

Additionally, Israel, the US best friend, or as some people put it unkindly, its master, may derive better security. The interests of the US military-industrial complex also would be enhanced. And it would certainly demonstrate the might of the US military powers to any would-be superpower.

The US spin-doctors were working overtime to justify the war against Iraq, with issues of weapons of mass destruction, the al-Qaeda link, human rights, 'liberation' of the Iraqi people, etc. It was so effective that polls indicated more than 50 percent of the US citizens believe Iraq had been responsible for the 9/11 act.

Sadly, the real threat of terrorists has now been left unattended by this diversion into a war with Iraq. And even more tragic, leaving aside such issues like legality and morality, is the fact that the US attack and invasion of a sovereign Arab country will lead to, as Egypt President Mohammed Hosni Mubarak stated, more Osama bin Ladens. What will the US do then? Attack more Arab countries?

Even more frightening is the probability that the future terrorist threat against the US may come from

its current allies such as Pakistan and Saudi Arabia. The former actually has weapons of mass destruction. Its people are kinfolks of the southern Afghans, the supporters of the Taliban, and fierce Muslims. It is so easy to imagine, rightly, that these people would hate the US for invading Iraq and killing its civilians. These are also the future Osamas.

Just in case anyone forgets, Osama bin Laden hails from Saudi Arabia, a land where the Wahhabi school of fundamentalist Islam is extremely powerful, an environment that breeds and succours terrorist groups like al-Qaeda.

US army sergeant Asan Akbar who recently killed his own military colleagues in Kuwait has been reported to have attended the University of California student mosque and the Bilal Islamic Center in Los Angeles. Both these organisations are managed and funded by Saudis. Stephen Schwartz a journalist writing for the Weekly Standards reported, "the Bilal Islamic Center and its Saudi-trained imams are known for venomous preaching of extremism." Australia too is now worried about these Saudi-funded schools.

And finally, to remind Mr Dillon of the 9/11 perpetrators, they were all Saudis and Egyptians. Not o­ne was an Afghan or an Iraqi.