Five years on: The debate over Iraq

Five years after the war in Iraq began, two Times columnists debated the decision in a series of letters. 

For readers who missed it, here is their correspondence.

-- Matthew Parris to David Aaronovitch: We have damaged ourselves — and it was avoidable

-- David Aaronovitch to Matthew Parris: The sanctions were failing, people were dying

-- Matthew Parris to David Aaronovitch: Neocons and their supporters have lost the argument

-- David Aaronovitch to Matthew Parris: The future is where all the judgments must be made

And the final word:

-- Nabil Mohammed Younis of Baghdad University to Matthew Parris and David Aaronovitch: The use of violence against us has left a terrible legacy

Comments

[Richard Young]

Parris 2, Aaronovitch 0
Parris advances to the quarter-final stage where he'll meet the winner of the Peter Oborne vs Christopher Hitchens clash. Commentators are predicting that five of the eight pundits in the quarters will be anti war, a remarkable performance and a sign that Common Sense premier Division is a far stronger league than La Dogmatism.