I found this old email I wrote to an online news service on 8th October 2001, at the start of the war in Afghanistan, and long before our misjudged involvement in Iraq:

"My initial reaction to the September 11th attacks in America - following disbelief and horror - was to ask what Britain's response would be. I assumed that this was a time to keep a low profile; for cool heads and few words other than those of condolence. Surely the only way to respond to an enemy as deadly and invisible as this was a tightening of security and the application of covert intelligence rather than a public display of muscle flexing.

I was therefore surprised and dismayed when Tony Blair's mug immediately appeared above the parapet threatening all kinds of dire retribution against the perpetrators of the outrage, and firmly establishing the UK in the eyes of the extremists as America's number one supporter. Was that really necessary? Couldn't we have shown our solidarity with America in more appropriate ways? Did we really need to fan the flames of hatred with such rhetoric, setting ourselves up as a sitting target for attacks on our own soil?

Now look at the headlines today: 'The US and Britain launch strikes'. No other nations are even mentioned in the world press, even though there are plenty who are working behind the scenes to counter the terrorist threat. We are now in the front line for future terrorist attacks. As one of your correspondents has already pointed out, if a Conservative government had responded in such an aggressive way to the current crisis the Labour party would be up in arms about it. Where are the voices of reason and caution in the Labour party? Or has the shiny new cult of Tony 'I'm a World Statesman' Blair rendered them all dumb?"