In a surprise move today, Iraqi spokesmen revealed that they will not support a war on Iraq, even if the United Nations passes a second resolution. British public opinion, of course, is against a totally pointless war to give George Bush more oil. Britons would, however support military action if the UN says it’s morally acceptable, and would the USA like to keep up its payments in future.

France, Germany, Russia, China and other countries with an understanding of international politics are firmly convinced that Bush, Blair and their sycophantic supporters have no right to demand Saddam leave power, but did not expect Iraq

to be adding its name to the list of nations against the war.

“We in Iraq are very concerned about developments in the Middle East,” a spokesman stated today. “We do not believe that the case for war has been made. We told the United Nations last week of the inaccuracies in Colynne Powell's speech – it’s simply not true that Saddam's not been co-operating, and war would be totally unjustified!”

Bush tried to brush off the fact yet another nation has objected to his diplomatic style, which some have described as “Gung Ho”, or “Bloody stupid”, on the grounds that “The Iraqis are inherently biased against war”. Bush added that “It’s obvious thaht Iraq will not

support a war on Sahddam. If Unahted States of American troops go to war, there is a slim chance Iraqis will be injured, possibly even coming under fire. We cannot expect support from them. But, of course, we don't care about support, or Iraqis.”

“If America attacks Iraq, I’ll be right in the firing line,” wailed Saddam Hussain, currently in a huge weapons bunker five hundred metres below Baghdad. “I really hope this war doesn't happen!”

Meanwhile, as the USA gears up for conflict, the man on the street remains sceptical. “Give us a quid!” he implored, “Saddam is letting us have anthrax at knock-down prices for ‘self-defence’!”