The point where I stopped reading Carmen (Proud to be ‘juvenile’, webdiary16Jan) was when she quoted something from The Guardian. Perhaps it is no worse than me quoting The Economist, but it is indicative of a gap I see. A big gap. The Guardian is a tired old London rag.

OK – I have read the rest of it, and Vietnam comes up yet again. I do not see the Vietnam experience being repeated in US foreign policy. It wasn’t in the first Gulf War, in Kosovo or Afghanistan. Nor will it be in Iraq this time around.

Carmen and those like her take the easy road. Target the US, offer no alternative solution and mush around in nostalgia for their youth, when they were weaned on very well founded anti-US sentiment. They are all products of the Vietnam trauma. I can understand it, but it does cause a distortion of reality.

Carmen says: “The momentum appears unstoppable and it’s my impression that many Australians have been lulled into a false sense of security about the Howard Government’s real intentions.” What kind of nonsense is this? There is no false sense of security. Everyone knows the Howard Government’s real intentions. Carmen alludes to a hidden agenda but she doesn’t spell it out.

The only agenda I am aware of is that Howard is a strong backer of the US, making him just the same as British Prime Minister Blair. Bush, Howard and Blair want a regime change in Iraq. It’s pretty simple. Where is the hidden part? Where is the false sense of security?

Carmen also comments that the US does not allow inspections of its own weapons of mass destruction. This is where all respect goes out the window. Some type of equivalence is being suggested between the US and vicious dictatorships. Iraq is a rogue state. The fact that a unanimous vote of the United Nations Security Council put the weapons inspectors in there in the first place is evidence of this. What purpose would be served in inspecting US weapons of mass destruction?

Then again, I suppose the UN only voted that way because America made them. It’s a zero sum game with the States and it’s always their fault. What a terrible world we live in. All created by Uncle Sam and his devious plans.

All would be fine if nothing was done. A bit of inspecting over there, a little more over here and we’ll all live in love and peace. The whole thing is a ridiculous charade. It is naivety in the extreme to think that there is not a significant threat of these weapons being released and used. Who really believes that Saddam Hussein is not likely to give or sell weapons to terrorists?

Exactly when will the inspections end? Let us imagine that the US just sat back and did nothing from this point. Would Hans Blick get up and say on Day X that the inspections are over and nothing much has been found? Let’s say he did that. Then what happens? I suppose all can relax and the world can go back to business as usual. We would be able to be so serene in the knowledge that nothing was found and the threat had passed. We could then just ignore Iraq and know that the whole thing was just a silly over reaction on the part of the United States.

Then in about two years from now when the weapons are sold to terrorists and deployed, killing say, three hundred or four hundred thousand people in a day or so, we could conclude that perhaps the inspectors didn’t find everything.

I think what is wanted is that at the MOMENT the weapons are sold or a millisecond before they are used, some action is taken. It’s an interesting approach. A sort of “let’s wait until the very last minute” thing. Let’s hope that last minute is well chosen.

So it seems the whole issue is about timing. Now is a tad early. If we wait until JUST the right time, perhaps it can be justified. Or taking it even further, let’s do nothing and wait until weapons are sold, released or used. Only THEN will we know we are justified. Only THEN will we know the mistakes of Vietnam are not repeated.

Protest is fine and should be encouraged. I don’t think it is juvenile, but I do think there is more than a hint of nostalgia about it in this case. I hope she had a nice day out on the water. I think Dr Lawrence is understandably moved by her historical association with encouraging Vietnam conscripts to tear up their “draft cards” (is that really what they were called in Australia or was that from Born on the Fourth of July? It all becomes so confusing).

This is not the 1970s. It is not about Gough Whitlam ending the Vietnam War all by himself. It’s not about conscription and sending 19 year olds into Vietnamese jungle for slaughter.

This is the 21st century. New York City has been attacked. Thousands dead. Australians have been attacked in Bali. There is an international network of extremists actively working to bring about “terror spectaculars”. The UN agrees that Saddam Hussein presents a real threat and should be disarmed. That’s why the weapons inspectors are there in Iraq. The United States has an overwhelming force. Australia is looking at supplying highly trained, career dedicated SAS resources plus some frigates and planes.

This is 2003, not 1973. A child born on the day Carmen encouraged the tearing up of “draft” cards would now be 30, heading into middle age. For such a child, the Whitlam government meant nothing. It was a long time ago that people were tearing up “draft” cards but no generation is quite so entitled as the Baby Boomers to own this current 21st century moment. After all, they are the entitled generation.

I suppose it is all part of the far reaching conspiracy of the American military industrial complex. They killed JFK and were responsible for Vietnam. Oliver Stone told me so. He’s a baby boomer and he’d surely know the truth.

Will we ever be free of that generation?