Leg Iron has a fine Phillippic on Gordon Brown over here.
But it raises a dreadful thought - one which, to be honest, has not occurred to me before, and which more cynical commentators may regard as blindingly obvious. I am generally optimistic and try to believe the best of people. But what if ...
The Gorgon didn't play fast and loose with soldier's lives just to stop Tiny Blur getting that quick victory in Iraq, which would have made him too powerful for the Gorgon to oust.
I had always assumed that Gordon Brown's comtempt for the armed services, and his consequent under-funding of the troops, was a result of his left-wing suspicion of armies and militarism. But could it be the case that the deliberate under-funding was a strike against Tony Blair? After all, a quick win in Iraq would have boosted Blair enormously, whereas a long-drawn-out and difficult campaign, with slow progress and a lot of casualties (which is in fact what has happened), would tarnish Blair's reputation and dog him in future whatever he did.
Could Brown really have hamstrung the Army and caused all those unnecessary deaths because of personal aminosity towards his former colleague? Out of pure spite, if you like? We know the pair had a difficult relationship, with Brown feeling entitled to the leadership, and mistrusting Blair over their 'gentlemen's agreement', so it's not impossible.
I find it hard to believe, but something in me says that it might be true. If so, then Brown is guilty of more than just selfish, narrow-minded incompetence. He would be wicked beyond the power of words to describe.