Indeed, I think it's quite possible that the French government, and maybe the Russian government, are opposing war for reasons of self-interest, among their other reasons. But it seems unlikely to me that 1,000,000 people would demonstrate on the streets of London over a diminishing of the flow of money into the French treasury.

Of course there are going to be anti-war demonstrators, and they've got a very valid point -- we probably shouldn't be going to war without U.N. buy-in. But for Iraq to do ANYTHING to live up to their obligations as outlined in 1441, the threat of force needs to be there. Compare and contrast Iraq's "compliance" before and after the deployment of fighting forces to the region.

I suppose those million protesters don't see any long-term problems with the current situation in Iraq? Were they then protesting the adoption of Resolution 1441 which states that "serious consequences" would arise if Iraq didn't comply? What did they think those serious consequences would be?