Bloody Tony Blair...

[specofdust]

Agreed. Blair was responsible for the bombings. Whether they were worth liberating a country, I don't know, but it was his decisions that resulted in us getting bombed.

On the issue of suicide bombings, I am 99.9% sure that if the Palestinians had the technology and weapons they would not have to resort to suicide bombings and instead attack from a distance. A suicide bomber is just their version of a smart bomb.

I agree. In some cases bombings are used in terroristic ways, palistinians use them because that is their most effective weapon, and they use them to fight a war, although, hopefully, that's a war that can be drawn to a close over the coming months, depending on what sharon does.

[Taz]

^^ Agree. Iraq was Blairs war - aginst the opinion of the majority of this country and the majority of the world. He's well protected. We are not. Every time I have to use the London Underground I sh*t myself because Blair has made each and every one of us a potential victim of terrorism - terrorism that never existed in this country until he decided to follow Bush and invade Iraq.

It's all very well for his ministers like Clarke to spout out new laws every day. How about tackling the root cause that led to the recent terrorist activity? i.e. His selfishness and stupidity in fighting an illegal war. It's no good saying that we are now fighting a war against terrorism. It's a war that Blair has created.

[specofdust]

I agree with the beggining of that post, but not all of it.

Firstly, you shouldn't worry about the underground, statistically you're more likely to get run over, suffer from a heart attack, or get die when an asteroid hits, then you are to be blown up by terrorists in this country

Secondly, the IRA did alot more damage to this country then Islamic fundamentalists have, they almost blew up the PM, so, terrorism has existed for a long time, it is not *that* abnormal. But I guess the Islamic fundys didn't want to kill us so much before the Iraq war, so theres a point there.

Obviously all the war on terror stuff is BS.

[dangel]

or get die when an asteroid hits, then you are to be blown up by terrorists in this country

Ok, i'll bite - back that one up

[specofdust]

New Scientist, a couple of years back. They worked out what would happen if an asteroid hit earth(we all die), and compared that number and it's statistical likelyness to many other forms of death caused by disaster. Like, IIRC you're more likely to be killed by an asteroid then by a volcano. A volcano might go off every couple of years, but all it takes is one asteroid to wipe us all out.

EDIT: I'll have a quick search through the NS website if you desire, but I'd rather not, it was several years back, and it was just a boxout at the top of the page, can't even remember the article.

[dangel]

Surely that only works in the context of _all_ our lifetimes, forever. For the short (geologically and asteriod-ically speaking) period we're alive the probability of dying by asteroid hit must be infintesimally smaller than pretty much everything else. Given the frequency of world-destroying events (i.e. i can't remember one recently happening) versus loons blowing you up (which i can remember throughout) in your lifetime.

Oh, ignore me i'm wondering so far off-topic here i'm never coming back even with GPS, a compass and flashing neon signs pointing the way.

[RVF500]

What absolute twaddle and complete ignorance. Is that what you want to believe? or told to believe?
I can't recall any attack by Muslim extremists on the west simply because they are against the way of life or because they hate the west in principle.

Muslims are allowed to fight only in self-defense, to preserve their national existence, and they were forbidden to be the aggressors. Killing innocent people is wrong, whatever religion they practice, and those that do are not true Muslims.

I'm afraid I have to disagree with you there. I believe that Bin Laden has promoted attacks on the west as our way of life is seen by him to be immoral. Does he not refer to the US as 'the great Satan?' for example. Ok, he also called Saddam an apostate.

Can someone please explain to me how the London bombers felt they needed to defend themselves, were acting in self defence or trying to preserve their national existence?

We can also list those who over the years have hijacked airplanes and ships. Murdering aircrew and passengers alike. One passenger on the Achille Lauro was murdered because he 'was old and useless' being wheelchair bound and in his 60's. Can someone explain how these people were a threat? How about the Isreali athletic team in Munich? Which anti Islamic plot were the workers in the World trade centre plotting?

In the case of the London bombers I feel that impressionable young men were indoctrinated by evil and morally corrupt men passing themselves off as spiritual leaders using their influence to get others to carry out their twisted ideals. They of course live to watch it on the news.

Now I know that the West isn't blameless but don't try and tell me that the Islamic world is blameless too.

[RVF500]

:: In a separate incident, 17 civilians were executed by armed men in the nearby town of Taji after being dragged from their homes in the middle of the night.

This was at the foot of the story about 100+ construction workers being killed in a suicide bomb attack today.

Now can someone tell me how these people were threatening anyones national existence, or indeed threatening anyone?

[iranu]

^^ indeed - those people were queing looking for work. The thing is that your average muslim apologist only sees the injustice where Israel and the west are concerned. They do not have the courage to look at what is being done in their name and openly speak against it. These terrorists in Iraq are not fighting for the Iraqi people they are murdering them in large numbers.

As a side note - the Palestinians have been offered a homeland 11 times since the creation of Israel in 1947. Each time they have turned it down. The last deal was the best but Arafat prefered death and the intafada. The arabs states prefer the conflict to continue because it diverts the angst felt by their own people towards their own illiberal, medieval, dictatorships.

[specofdust]

A civil war looks likely. How much longer can bush afford to keep troops in Iraq in a major deployment like right now?

But so long as peace isn't restored they really have to stay. However, so long as the western troops are there there'll be suicide bombers and a resistance movement because they're there. A vicious cycle that could end up very bad.

[TheAnimus]

Look what happened in Spain, they had any attacks since they withdrew? No, I'm not saying we should withdraw, but invade a country and what do we expect, especially a religion such as Islam where they considered themselves muslim before considering themselves english/iraqi/saudi/pakistani or whichever country they reside.

Want to buy my stone that keeps away tigers?

Seriously, this thread revival is bad enough, but to quote babage, I am not able rightly to apprehend the kind of confusion of ideas that could provoke such a question.

I mean, thats giving into terrorism. My electronics lecturer described me as "scary". I am a master at making overly complex circuites using nothing but yellow wire (i find the colour less confusing than blue) and NAND gates.

The day they did that, i would start wiping out EVERYONE in the uk with an IQ bellow what is now 100. Because why the hell shouldn't i be allowed to do that? My april fools jokes have shown what i can get away with when someone pisses me off (that was when i was 14 too!)

I mean, the outrage in spain was far more complex than presence in iraq.

Iraq isn't the big travesty, talk to most verging on radical muslims, what do you think it might be? A certain self proclaimed choosen people? Who we said in the 60s sure, live here? Then allowed to get nuclear arms.

The fact we let these people have nothing, only giving a damn when its a chance to make a fassion statement about it?

Too many of you here get upset with the deaths of a few people. look at a scale map of the world, see the enormity of it all. We're letting china do what the hell it wants because of monetry concernes with industry. All a terroist needs to be, is someone with nothing/little to loose. Why do you think i've not gone blowing up the local car theaving scallys round here? Everyone knows where they are, who they are. I'm satisifed the legal proccess has failed. Because i've too much to loose. Its not because i can't do it, or because i'd feal bad about their deaths, any parent able to not care what they're 15 year old is nicking isn't worth worrying about their emotional state.

Iraq might as well be a variable, it could be any bloody country, and as english we (and the french) are more resposnible for this than the great to hate USA.

Then you get people arguing points in forums, but just the notion that we should ever do something under durest is bloody scarey, espesually something as easy to do as terrorism.