One of the things that’s really bizarre about much pro-war discussion is the way in which various nations are being characterised as good or bad, depending on who happens to be making critical decisions. Thus, Australia, Britain, Bulgaria, Italy and Spain are “good”, Germany and France are “bad”, and Turkey was “good” until the weekend but is now “bad”. The fact is that there is no country in the world (not excepting the US) where a majority of the population supports the view that an invasion of Iraq should be undertaken when and if George Bush decides it is appropriate. The only thing separating the “good” from the “bad” is the existence of a government that can ignore public opinion for one reason or another. The Turks were “good” because everyone assumed Turkish democracy was a sham, but now that it turns out not to be a sham they are “bad”

In an update on previous discussion of the odds, this piece in The Guardian says

British troops are now so embedded into American war plans that there would be huge operational problems if the government let the US go it alone against Iraq, according to senior military sources.

“I don’t think the prime minister’s got any choice now. He’s gone too far to go back,” said a senior military official. “We are so embedded in this structure, so integral, that it would be very difficult for the Americans if we pulled out.”

This tends to confirm part of my argument, that Bush is unlikely to go ahead without Blair, but with the counterspin that, therefore, Blair is unlikely to refuse. What this means, though, is that Blair has immense leverage if he chooses to use it, for example, to support the Canadian compromise of a set of clear demands to be imposed on Saddam.