The so called 'war on terror' has if anything fuelled terrorism and this attack is almost wholly due to our invasion of Iraq.
I blame the so-called war on terror for this frightening attack. Joining the US in Bush's unrelated and unprovoked attack on Iraq has made London a target, nothing else. Bush and Blair have made the world more dangerous for all of us.
These two people seriously believe arab terrorists never struck Britain before 11SEP2001? Lockerbie anyone?
Since the attack on Afghanistan, the US has not been serious in fighting al-Qaeda, because it sees al-Qaeda's existence necessary for the American forces to remain in Afghanistan. As long as the US just talks about fighting the terrorism (rather than taking action), we cannot be immune for terror attacks, be it in Madrid or Tehran or London or Baghdad. We should really think about where the next target would be.
If we ignore that Al Qaeda was working in Iraq before we invaded Iraq, and assume that Al Qaeda is being left in Afghanistan to justify keeping troops there, then why would we need to be looking at the next target instead of just cleaning up Afghanistan? And how could we clean up Afghanistan if the terrorists can just skedaddle into Pakistan, Syria, Iran, or any other islamic country... or even into Europe, where the WTC attackers did most of their planning.
Of course any terrorist act against innocent people in condemned, but we should look at the reasons why they did this in an impartial way
i.e., normally blowing people up would be a bad thing, but...
Goe, given you an idea of how we're being blamed.
No comments:
Post a Comment