On Thursday 13th February, Cambridge City Council voted overwhelmingly in favour of making Cambridge an official city of peace. On Saturday 15th February, over one million people gathered in London to march against the possible war with Iraq. BBC Cambridgeshire followed a group of friends from Cambridge - why did they decide to march?

Where do you stand? Do you agree with Blair and Bush? Do you think Cambridge's councillors had the right to vote us in as a city of peace? Tell us where you stand. Have your say here.

Your comments

For those of you who do not support this mission of mercy for the Iraqi people, you are the one's that would hide your head and cover your ears with your hands, while your neighbor was being [attacked].
Glenn Grieve, USA

As a Hills Road student who took part in the protests yesterday, I would like to clear up the following points. Two of the three students arrested were arrested because they were the organizers, not because of "public order offences". I personally feel that there was no evidence that Iraq was to blame for 9/11, and the only reason that the US believes Iraq to have WMDs is that they sold them in the first place. What will war with Iraq achieve? It could cause Hussein to use the WMDs he supposedly has, and then what. Bush will jump up and down shouting "yay, i told you so". Isn't it too late by then??
Tim, Cambridge
More on the Cambridge student march >>

IT is sad when a super power has to start war with a third world country.This and all over oil.God help us.
mike, bentonville,ar u.s.a

No other nation has so many weapons of mass desctruction as the USA. No other nation has used nuclear weapons against innocent civilians. This war is not about weapons of mass desctruction. This war is not about improving the life of the suffering Iraqi population. This war is about the control of resources and about strengthening the power of the USA. The USA would never bomb Israel for their continous breach of UN resolutions and killings in Palestine. This war is not against terror, this war is terror, and this war will cause more terror. The winners of this war will be the oil industry, the arms industry, and radical terroristic groups. The treatment of the prisoners in Guantanamo bay by the USA, the unwillingness of the USA to accept an international court of law, are only an foretaste of what "old europe" and the rest of the world will learn in the future.
Immo, Cambridge

Is it about Oil, or WMD, or 9/11 , or regime change , or humanity ......or what .......bottom line is the Bush wants a war for all kinds of convenient reasons from family revenge to combatting terrorism. How sad it is to see the US and Blair pleased when they find evidence of WMD, albeit tiny. Blair is on a mission - like his desire to save Africa etc - all very laudable but he must carry the people with him, and he isn't. Like Ken Clarke says - we are making ourselves bigger targets for extremists. Blair should go and get a job at the Un or Brussels somewhere which is more relevant to his mission and ego.
Tim Hancock, Cambridge

I am a U.S. citizen who works and resides in the United Kingdom. I have come to think of this country as my secibd home and it amazes me how cavalier peoples attitude are toward Saddam Hussein, Iraq and terrorism are in general. I have mixed feelings about the threat of war, which I'm sure most people do, however I believe taking Saddam out of the picture would be a benefit to the Iraqi people and the world in general. Those of you who say the U.S. has not proved that he still has weapons of mass destuction, show me your proof that he had destroyed them. What happens when terrorist are given access to these weapons? Where do you suppose access to the Ricin that was found in London originated? Think about it before you condemn the U.S. and your government.
Mike Aldridge

Britain and America must make the case clear before any war. I believe that Britain should go, and get Saddam... He is blatantly playing games. Why didnt he agree to dismantle his missles in the first place, or even 12 years ago? mmm, makes me suspicous. Oil? America got one of its own, Texas. France and Germany though, do have oil in Iraq, thats why they dont want to go to war, not for peace totally, and knowing Chirac, he will do a dramatic u turn at the last minute.
George , Cambridge

Thank goodness some politicians can be sensible. War, particularly without UN support, will simply spawn more recruits for Al Qaeda. It has taken 60 odd years for the UN to develop a reasonably effective framework for international relations. The US proposals to ignore the UN is simply a return to the "Might is right" philosophy of the 19th Century
neal bebbington, Cambridge

No-one wants to go to war, well no-one in their right mind. Everyone keeps saying that there are plenty of other ways of stopping Saddam, other than war well what are they? we would all love there to be a peaceful solution, well lets here them from the politicians, I don't just mean lets extend the time the inspectors are there or send more inspectors, lets have some real ideas that are going to work. THIS MAN NEEDS TO BE STOPPED, so lets stop him.
ROSE NELSON, cambridge

Congratulations to my city council for a resolution (albeit not such strong one as I would have liked) against military agression against Iraq. There doesn't seem to be much doubt that the majority of Cambridge residents are also opposed to the military adventure. For example, a survey by the local newspaper found 82% were opposed (Cambridge Evening News, 7 February 2003)
Stephen Hewitt, Cambridge, England

There isn't sufficient evidence against Iraq to justify a war. And even if there was evidence of weapons, what can justify further killing of innocent civillians already crippled by the economic sanctions placed on their country? The people of Iraq have not yet recovered from the Gulf war, cancer is rife in areas where it was unknown prior to American bombing with nuclear warheads. Are we going to subject them to further horror? Because horror would be upon them, cloaked behind the mission to oust Saddam.
Anon

The United States has a hugh reserve of oil of its own. The idea that they would start a war over oil is beyond comprehension. Saddam is a devious, evil man that the world will be well rid of. Why hasn't the CIA or other intellingence agencies had him assinated? What ever it takes, so be it. North Korea your next.
Ken Harris, RAF Mildenhall

Pardon me? "Iraq has been terrorising the US"? Your country supported Saddam Hussein's war on Iran when Khomenei was the United States' chosen whipping boy, to the extent of peddling chemical weapons to him. You did nothing when he used those weapons on Kurdish separatists (was that any different from deliberately handing out smallpox-infected blankets to Native Americans in the 1800s?). He then pushed his luck by trying to overthrow the almost equally undemocratic regime in Kuwait. Nobody in the West cared about the Kuwaitis any more than they had about the Iranians but we didn't want Saddam getting a stranglehold on the oilfields, especially as Saudi Arabia looks increasingly likely to go the way of the Shah's Iran. We intervened because the supply of oil was, potentially, at stake. This doesn't add up to Iraq "terrorising" the US. If you're thinking of 9/11, there is no evidence whatsoever that Iraq had anything ! to do with it (indeed, I've yet to see any that would even convict Bin Laden), while any nuclear weapons that Iraq may or may not possess could only be delivered by pathetic, Sixties-technology unguided rockets with a range generously estimated at 150 miles. Your Trident submarine fleet, cruise missiles, B1 and B2 bombers etc should be able to counter them.
Patrick, Cambridge

War is not a choice. As us citacines, we are forced into it by acts brought upon us. Iraq has been terrorizing the us too long. Nobody wants to go to war but where would we be if we diddnt fight back for what we believe in? thanks
angie, usa

I believe that war with Iraq should be used as a last resort but if it comes to it we British and America must stand together and fight Saddam until he once again gives in. I personally feel that if Saddam gives up the presidency of Iraq he should be allowed to go into exile and to live his life out peacefully in another country. But however if Iraq do use these allegedbanned weapons they say they have I feel it comes down to one basic thing - we and America have more resources than Iraq and can easily out do Saddam! What I mean to say is we should just build bigger and better whatever the consequences!
Daniel Rawson, Age 15, St. Ives, Cambridgeshire, England

If we go to war, hundreds of thousands of people, young people, will die... If we don't, we face the realization of a threat - a global nuclear holocaust. There is no choice... Furthermore, I am appalled by the actions of Cambridge City Council, but I didn't vote for them either.
Anonymous, Cambridge

I don't agree with war. I don't agree with arresting people and locking them up. However, when you have murderers, rapists, dangerous dictators and the like, you have to do something about it. I think these peace protesters are mis-guided, nieve and judge the nasty people in this world by their own standards, which is a very dangerous thing to do.
Bryan Palmby, Peterborough

The March 15th. Feb. 2003
They came from North, South, East and West Into London to protest.
A hundred thousand strong, the papers say.
This is an extremely special day.

The placards read “Peace - No War,
But many have heard that cry before.
The PM says “We face great disruption
With Iraq’s missiles of mass destruction.
Small pox, anthrax and deadly gas,
We really cannot let that pass”.

“We don’t want war”, the people cry,
“Why poke the tiger in the eye?
He’s sleeping in his lair all right,
So don’t provoke him to a fight”.

The French and Germans stand apart,
They really haven't got the heart.
“Another war”, they say, “Not us.
We seriously cannot stand the fuss.
The Americans really hate our guts,
And we don’t like them very much”.

Bush and Blair then declare,
“But if we want to be quite fair.
The really only sure solution
Is to have a second resolution”.

So the people departed to their homes and flats, Discarding their woolly scarves and hats.

But what about Iraq’s Saddam?
I don’t think that he really cares a damn!
beryl knight, hemingford abbots, cambs

I have mixed feelings about this war. I live in the U.S. I have a son-in-law and daughter stationed at Lakenheath. I read your comments and wonder if they are safe in a country where people are so anti American. We are at at time when we feel that we must do something to stop terrorism from getting worse, but wonder if war wont make it worse. Do we let people like Saddam keep building more weapons and getting stronger or do we stop it now. Do you really think in a country like America that oil is the reason for war. What about the attack on New York? Do we just ignore it and think that it will all go away? What and when will be the next time. I am not for war but I really don't want to live with fear of the next attack. I would rather go ahead and face fear in the face. If we let the strongest countries in the world,the U.S. & England let him control us then what He has won.
Brenda, Texas usa

Resolution 1441 is about dis arming Saddam Hussein. If the weapons inspectors have NOT found the weapons of mass destruction, How then can they go and dis arm him?
Ange Costard, Cambridge

I make my position perfectly clear - Amanda Taylor (Cambridge City Council) might be speaking for everybody in Cambridge, but she isn’t speaking for me and I don’t think that I’m a lone voice in the wilderness. I think that this City Council are operating beyond their remit by even taking a vote on this. As far as I’m concerned their function is to keep the streets clean, to keep the traffic moving, to keep the public toilets useable and beyond that it becomes a national issue.
Phil, Cambridge (on BBC Radio Cambridgeshire)

I cannot blieve that the government is thinking of havving another war. I nursed young men through the last world war and I would not wish tht on anyone. It is an evil not to have lerned from that.
Elizabeth Bryant, Suffolk

Why are we pandering to these terrorists? All they have to do is make a threat and the whole country closes down. You don't get this in places like Israel or France where they know how to deal with terrorist threats. Get rid of Saddam Hussein now, and get rid of the terrorist threat. We will not be held to ransome in this country.
Anon, Huntingdon

I believe that that the claim by George Bush that Iraq is holding weapons of mass destruction is just a rouse to gain remove Saddam and gain statigic control of the oil rich regions of the middle east. The United States put Saddam into power in Iraq because he was a leader that they would be able to control. In fact some even suggest that he was put there to ensure that Kuwait (and it's oil rich lands) would always side with the United States. Now that Saddam is not doing exactly was the US wants (or tells) him to do they have decided that it is time to put another puppet into power. Should British blood be spilt to achieve this??
Mark Blumsky