YOU DON'T SAY: "Elite forces from Iraq's Republican Guard may not be called upon to protect Saddam Hussein in the event of an American attack - for fear that they might turn against him. The Iraqi leader is determined to keep his crack troops out of Baghdad where their tanks and heavy weaponry could be used to overthrow the regime rather than defend it, the Guardian has learned. Read the rest here. (You will have to deal with a plate full of cookies before the story loads.)

The Guardian's editorial page (not that there's a difference with a European paper) has been, shall we put it, less than enthusiastic about military action against the Hussein regime. Is this article simply another version of the give-peace-a-chance argument?