HOUSE PRICES: I SYMPATHISE fully with the young couple searching for a house in the centre of Durham City (Echo, Mar 7).

Two years ago I set out to buy a similar property and was prepared to offer up to £120,000.

Three estate agents tried to fob me off with remarks such as: "Oh, that's a student area." One did not even bother to take my name and contact numbers. Eventually I was very fortunate in that I did find a house, but only because it needed substantial renovations.

It really is time for our residents associations, the city council and the university to do some serious long-term planning regarding students' accommodation in the city.

Otherwise, judging by current trends in the property market, in 20 years or less the entire streets of the city centre are going to be owned solely by student landlords. - PM Kay, Durham City.

WAR AGAINST IRAQ

PETER MULLEN (Echo, Mar 11) continues to amaze me. Now he anticipates that the Iraq crisis will merely be a storm in his teacup, while 66 per cent of all women in this country are just "making a fuss".

He is more concerned about the inconvenience of having to move to St Sepulchre's - his other church. What kind of attitude is this?

St Matthew 23 comes to mind, particularly verses 24 and 27.

Blessed are the peacemakers! - Ben Andriessen, Ramshaw, Bishop Auckland.

LIFE is strange. It is often full of curious coincidences. For example, in June 2001 George W Bush, whilst speaking to the Swedish Prime Minister, was unaware that the television camera was still running and said: "It's amazing I won. I was running against peace, prosperity and incumbency." Nearly two years later the world is on the verge of an American-led war.

It is curious that any reconstruction of Iraq will be done solely by American companies, all of which will be paid for by Iraqi oil.

These rather curious facts raise questions over who George W Bush was intending to go to war against and why a war against Iraq will be so financially profitable for the Americans? - CT Riley, Spennymoor.

FORMER UN secretary general Dr Boutros Ghali has publicly stated that the "no-fly zones" over Iraq were, and still are, illegal. They have no UN authorisation and are a breach of the UN charter.

The recent extension of the bombing of these zones by Britain and the United States has started the war against Iraq in defiance of the Nuremburg principles which the UN accepted as international law in 1950.

Why are we going to destroy the remaining fragile infrastructure of that beleaguered country for marginal tactical advantage, in the certain knowledge that thousands of civilian casualties will be the result?

It is estimated that, at an absolute minimum, over a hundred civilians have been killed in these zones by US and British bombing. We have started an unprovoked war against Iraq on the coat-tails of the US, without waiting for a UN resolution or Hans Blix's final report. Read my lips... it was always about oil. - J Fitzpatrick, Secretary, Socialist Labour Party, Tyne Bridge Constituency.

IF Britain gets over this war crisis successfully, we must thank Tony Blair, and also Jack Straw, as the greatest Prime Minister since Winston Churchill.

He has taken more flak and embarrassment from almost everyone, including myself, the way he has gone on about it.

He and Mr Straw have proved better diplomats than MI5 and MI6 put together. Therefore I take off my cap to salute them both. - Alf Pyle, Kelloe.

THE Bush/Blair plan to start the war against Iraq is now starting to unfold.

It is doubtful if they will get UN approval, but they will still go ahead and as one spokesman said have a "good, clean war".

As we all know, war is never "good" and never "clean", but this is the mentality of the Bush/Blair supporters.

The Bush/Blair plan is obviously to be seen as heroic after this war, irrespective of the terrible consequences.

Politics is indeed a dirty business and in President Bush and Mr Blair we have two egocentric individuals who are prepared to kill without compunction to pursue their own ends. - Hugh Pender, Darlington.

POST OFFICES

I WONDER whether pensioners and other state beneficiaries are aware that in an increasing number of areas there is a growing revolt against the new arrangements for the payment of pensions and other benefits.

Beneficiaries are offered direct payment into either a bank or building society account or, if they wish, through a Post Office card account.

When information is sent to beneficiaries, it does not cover the possibility of doing nothing and continuing to receive payments using benefits books.

The fact is that people have the option of ignoring letters sent by the Post Office. If they do, the Post Office must continue payments via books. There is no way in which benefits can be withheld. This would surely be illegal.

The Government does not want this but they now admit that they will have to introduce an "exceptional service" for those who want to keep their books.

Beneficiaries who object to the new options should therefore consider withholding their consent to them and stick out for retention of payment books, at least until the "exceptions service" comes into being. In any event, everyone should reject any option which is likely to result in local post office closures because of reduced business. They should therefore, shun payment into bank/building society accounts and go for Post Office card accounts even though this system has been deliberately made unnecessarily complicated in order to put people off. - R K Bradley, Darlington.