IS Matthew A Clarke serious? He believes that the Iraq war was part of a wicked "socialist agenda." What absolutely utter garbage.

The most right-wing President the USA has ever had would not lead a "socialist agenda." The suggestion is as preposterous as it is ludicrous. Incidentally, Mr Clarke seems more concerned with the waste of taxpayers' money then with the loss of British, American, Iraqi and other lives.

This correspondent then goes on to declare that those who support campaigns against global poverty "are essentially supporting the same interventionist agenda."

I am aware, of course, that some incredibly corrupt and greedy African elite will use extra money to build golden palaces for themselves, instead of helping the starving. However, "love thy neighbour" does not just mean the bloke next door.

Furthermore, if Mr Clarke was a refugee in Darfur I think he would welcome compassionate action whether it was "interventionist" or not.

I believe this correspondent has some bit of paper that indicates that he did rather well in theology while at college. All I can say is that his manner of interpreting the Christian message appears to be very different to the way in which I understand it.

I think you should clarify your position Mr Clarke. Are you a man of God or a politician of the grotesque way-out Right? It is impossible to be both.

D E MARGRETT,

Worcester.