Marisa Wilson - caregiver: `I support the United States' action 100 per cent. I support it because what I believe from the past news reports is that [Hussein] has chemical and biological weapons which could do a lot of harm not only to the United States but also to many other countries like Guyana. I don't agree with those people who say he is going in only for Iraq's oil; I think he is fighting for the Iraqi people and the safety of the people of the US. With what Saddam Hussein is capable of, I think it is necessary. But what I don't support is them going ahead without UN support, they should have brought forward solid evidence before they decided to go ahead.'

Marita Persaud - accounts clerk: `I am not in support of the US military action and I think they should pull out of Iraq immediately. A lot of innocent people are being killed, including many women and children. The United States are the only ones in possession of such weapons of mass destruction, aren't they a threat? Remember the accidental bombings in Afghanistan? It seems as if America believes that they are God, but it's not up to them. There is no proof and unless they had some concrete proof, I don't think they should have proceeded. I believe they are getting in over their heads and their actions have undermined the United Nations as a peace-keeping body.'

Chris Wilson - aeronautical information services officer: `Bottom line: I think the offensive is economically based. I just think they want Hussein's oil base. The United States President [George] Bush is pursuing this with ulterior motives and I am not in agreement with his stands. What we are seeing is just one nation imposing their will on another because of different views, different culture and a different way of life. And also we, the citizens, we have no actual way of knowing exactly what is happening because the only news reports we get are the US and a lot of that could just be the US propaganda machine. How do we know that [Saddam] has weapons of mass destruction? The UN weapons inspectors didn't find anything, although the US has continued to say he has. The US has not produced the evidence. [The US], they are also in possession of weapons of mass destruction. They have gone ahead without the United Nations. My question to the world is: What is to prevent the US from going to another country after Iraq and doing the same? They have failed to show us any real evidence; what they have shown us is that they are bullies. Nobody is safe now, [President] Bush is saying that if you're not with me, you are against me and where is democracy in a statement like that?

Godwin Austin - internal security: `No, I don't think their actions are necessary and I don't support them. This situation could have been resolved through other means. Why aren't they providing the evidence? They are claiming that Iraq has chemical and biological capabilities. But why aren't they supporting their claims with evidence? From the news reports that I have seen, I think he is hiding something, but I don't think that it is a justification for war.'

Gwendolyn Chacon - housewife: `I think what they are doing is wrong. Imagine if Iraq had planned to invade their country. And if Saddam Hussein does have the chemical and biological capability they say he has, why go now? He can retaliate. Now with this attack a lot of innocent people are dying for no reason. I do believe that President Bush has some justification, his arguments seem valid, especially the introduction of democracy. But when innocent people are being killed I can't support their action. I believe the US should have waited for UN support and what they have done by going ahead without it, is undermine the UN.

Afraaz Ousman - contractor: `I think the United States is trying to bully the world. They are trying to start colonisation. It's obvious that it's all about the oil. This attack was forthcoming since September 11. They began by hunting bin Laden, they bombed Afghanistan, and the people there are still suffering the effects of the US action there. And now the US is trying to do the same with Iraq. I think it's plain they are going after Iraq's oil. Hussein is widely supported in his country. Bush's argument is that he is in possession of weapons of mass destruction, weapons which were probably sold by the US during his father's time in office. And look at it this way, America also has those capabilities, they have weapons of mass destruction, why don't they disarm? I believe they should go back to the United Nations to find some other alternative. It didn't call for a war. A lot of people will suffer and even now many of the Iraqi's are fleeing to other countries.

Yonette Anthony - housewife: I am not supporting the US' actions. I think this will have a tremendous impact on a lot of smaller countries, including Guyana. I think for example fuel prices will go up again. It will affect a lot of things. And people will lose their families, I don't think Saddam Hussein poses any threat to the world, I think it's a personal vendetta between him and President Bush.'

Royston Greenidge - shift operator: `I don't think this is the right thing but I personally believe that Saddam Hussein has both chemical and biological weapons and should disarm. But the UN weapons inspectors didn't find anything and the US has presented no proof, they just started bombing. And I think that is just a show of their mentality; they think they are above international law. I don't think they should have started bombing without providing proof.'