Madam, - I generally ignore the infantile and incoherent arguments of Mark Steyn, but I can't resist commenting on a few of his "10 reasons why the naysayers were wrong about Iraq" (Opinion, March 21st).
In reason number 8, Mr Steyn writes: "As we now know, the only folks pilfering the oil were those well-connected officials. . . from the UN's disgusting Oil for Food programme".
In fact, just this week BBC's Newsnight reported a plan drawn up by Pentagon neo-conservatives in March 2003 to privatise the entire Iraq oil industry and undermine OPEC. The plan was effectively defeated by the big oil companies which prefer the lucrative status quo.
Answering reason number 2, Mr Steyn baldly claims: "Two years on: no humanitarian disaster". How many civilian deaths are required for a Steynsian disaster? More than the 17,000 estimated by the Iraq Body Count group? More than the 100,000 estimated by the Lancet study last November?
Reason number 9 is the most laughable. In reply to naysayer Bill Neely ("Remember [WMD]? Not a single one has yet been found"), Steyn writes: "They were found. In Libya. Close enough for me." By that reckoning, the US should have invaded Ireland, Tripoli being closer to Dublin than Baghdad. Besides, nuclear weapons weren't found in Libya. Briefing the UN Security Council last November, the International Atomic Energy Agency Director General reported that Libya "aimed to enrich uranium" - a long way from producing a weapon.
Can't The Irish Times find a more intelligent, better informed and, frankly, more honest columnist to present a right-wing, Bush-friendly viewpoint? - Yours, etc.,
MATTHEW DAVEY, Lombard Street West, Dublin 8.