I read with keen interest the comments of your young correspondent - Daniel Lake (EA 21 February 21) and would welcome the opportunity to comment on his letter.

Daniel exercises a right to declare an opinion which is contrary to the one held by the people he condemns. The freedom to express our views is evidence that we live in a democracy where the right to a different viewpoint is sacrosanct and hopefully this will be preserved for all time.

To accuse supporters of peace as being cowards and traitors to the entire free and democratic world suggests that Daniel doesn't really accept democracy for what it is the freedom to be different and to say what you feel to be true. Is he seriously suggesting one million marchers in London are cowards. If so I suggest, even though they formed part of the majority who feel a war has not yet been justified they were very brave cowards to march against the might of the Government propaganda machine

No one can disagree that Saddam Hussein is a tyrant or that the world would be better off with less 'Saddam type rulers' but the world is full of tyrants who are treating their people every bit as badly as Saddam treated the Kurds and Marsh Arabs.

Before our Government embarks on a crusade to rid the world of another tyrannical leader they really must consider the ethical issue of "who next" Mr Blair has hinted it might be North Korea but it could just as legitimately be Mr Mugabe in Zimbabwe, after all he is hardly a saint and we know thousands of people have been killed under his orders and millions will die of starvation due to his nefarious activities. Yet our morally inclined Government does not seek to institute a regime change in his country.

As for Mr Blair it can be said of him "He was a man of promise, but alas he has proved to be a man of promises". To describe him as a leader of courage and integrity is asking too much of a very sceptical British public.

Des Morgan

Caraway Drive

Swindon