or Connect
AppleInsider › Forums › Other Discussion › AppleOutsider › PoliticalOutsider › London Terror Attack: Politics
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

London Terror Attack: Politics - Page 2

post #41 of 369
Quote:
Originally posted by giant
but there was everything else that motivated that one.

Like what?
post #42 of 369
Quote:
Originally posted by Chris Cuilla
Well...there was a WTC/Pentagon attack and there had been no Iraq invasion.

Both Spain and Britain have (had) governments that very directly has supported the wierd american concept of "war on terror". I would feel a bit more insecure if I lived in Italy or Denmark then I do here in Norway. Yet we also have a few soldiers in Iraq, for some absurd reason.
Bill Bradley to comedian Bill Cosby: "Bill, you are a comic, tell us a joke!"
- "Senator, you are a politician, first tell us a lie!"
Reply
Bill Bradley to comedian Bill Cosby: "Bill, you are a comic, tell us a joke!"
- "Senator, you are a politician, first tell us a lie!"
Reply
post #43 of 369
Quote:
Originally posted by NaplesX
USS Cole, WTC 1, Tanzania... on and on and on.

And what do all those things have in common? Think hard.

edit:fixed
post #44 of 369
Quote:
Originally posted by BRussell
Actually the first Iraq War in 1990 was the reason for terrorism in the 1990s.

And 9/11?
post #45 of 369
Quote:
Originally posted by New
Both Spain and Britain have (had) governments that very directly has supported the wierd american concept of "war on terror". I would feel a bit more insecure if I lived in Italy or Denmark then I do here in Norway. Yet we also have a few soldiers in Iraq, for some absurd reason.

But this doesn't answer the question. Ostensibly the reason for yesterday's terrorist attack (and the one in Spain) was the invasion of Iraq. But this couldn't have been the reason for 9/11. It (invasion of Iraq) hadn't occurred yet.
post #46 of 369
Quote:
Originally posted by Chris Cuilla
What does this mean?

apparently nothing. Terrorist attacks are completely irrational, lack any strategic thought and exist outside of all existing political structures, right? no

As groverat noted, all of this has its roots in centuries of interaction between political units worldwide. Like everything else in the world, you have to understand the immediate and historical contexts to understand the moment.
post #47 of 369
Quote:
Originally posted by Chris Cuilla
But this doesn't answer the question. Ostensibly the reason for yesterday's terrorist attack (and the one in Spain) was the invasion of Iraq. But this couldn't have been the reason for 9/11. It (invasion of Iraq) hadn't occurred yet.

I never said it was. If you can't think of any reason at all for the 9/11 attacks then you should use your mac to accuire some knowledge instead of just typing stuff.

Here is a good place to start.
Bill Bradley to comedian Bill Cosby: "Bill, you are a comic, tell us a joke!"
- "Senator, you are a politician, first tell us a lie!"
Reply
Bill Bradley to comedian Bill Cosby: "Bill, you are a comic, tell us a joke!"
- "Senator, you are a politician, first tell us a lie!"
Reply
post #48 of 369
These attacks are not in response to Iraq, but part of a continuous war on the civilized world. They will not rest until we are dead. Therefore it is our duty to kill them first.

In the long run, the spread of Democracy and economic development in the Middle East will strangle the terrorist-fueling ideology. I think that most Muslims want to be more like us and less like them. Sorry, no links for that statement, just a hunch.
Moe has left the building
Reply
Moe has left the building
Reply
post #49 of 369
Quote:
Originally posted by NaplesX
Here is what strikes me as funny, not in a haha kind of way:

Everyone is all to willing to justify modern terrorism with centuries of "western meddling".

But no-one here seems to justify "western meddling" with centuries of radical Muslim savagery.

centuries? how about that.

Look at the map, close to all muslim countries have borders drawn by colonial powers.

Why is it the US have been involved in close to 240 interventions in other countries only this century?
Bill Bradley to comedian Bill Cosby: "Bill, you are a comic, tell us a joke!"
- "Senator, you are a politician, first tell us a lie!"
Reply
Bill Bradley to comedian Bill Cosby: "Bill, you are a comic, tell us a joke!"
- "Senator, you are a politician, first tell us a lie!"
Reply
post #50 of 369
Quote:
Originally posted by New
Why is it the US have been involved in close to 240 interventions in other countries only this century?

Wow, and it's only been 4 years.
post #51 of 369
Quote:
Originally posted by midwinter
shooting at terrorists makes more terrorists, not fewer.

So instead we leave them alone, pretend they don't exist. Then like a cancer they will grow and become a stronger force until which time we have another 9/11 scale attack. Brilliant.
MacBook Pro 15" (Unibody)/2.4GHz Core 2 Duo/2 GB RAM/250GB HD/SuperDrive
iMac 20"/2 GHz Core 2 Duo/2 GB RAM/250 GB/SuperDrive
PowerBook G4 12"/1 GHz/1.25 GB RAM/60GB/Combo
iMac G3 333 MHz/96 MB...

Reply
MacBook Pro 15" (Unibody)/2.4GHz Core 2 Duo/2 GB RAM/250GB HD/SuperDrive
iMac 20"/2 GHz Core 2 Duo/2 GB RAM/250 GB/SuperDrive
PowerBook G4 12"/1 GHz/1.25 GB RAM/60GB/Combo
iMac G3 333 MHz/96 MB...

Reply
post #52 of 369
Quote:
Originally posted by giant
Terrorist attacks are completely irrational, lack any strategic thought and exist outside of all existing political structures, right?

Never suggested they were completely irrational or lacked any strategic thought or exist outside of all existing political structures.

However, I am unwilling to allow someone to justify violent, deadly attacks (particularly against unarmed civilians).

There are political approaches and there are war approaches. What the terrorists seem to be saying is that they are unwilling to work within political processes to get what they want, but instead jump right to war and violence.

I won't deny that the people that have perpetrated these attacks (over the past decade or so) feel oppressed or angry or otherwise wronged by the western world (and the U.S. specifically). But that feeling isn't necessarily correct...and it also isn't necessarily a justification for violent tactics.
post #53 of 369
Quote:
Originally posted by NaplesX
Where are the most corrupt, oppressive and savage parts of the earth located?

Why it's the ME, of course.

Really? Not africa? rwanda? congo? Look anywhere else that western colonialism touched and you'll see similar and sometimes more severe problems directly resuting from it.
post #54 of 369
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/4663313.stm

"On Thursday Mr Galloway said Londoners had paid the price for Iraq and Afghanistan.

He told the Commons it was the US-led coalition's actions in Afghanistan, Iraq and Guantanamo which had inflamed hatred of the West in the Muslim world."

"Earlier Mr Galloway said he was absolutely clear the bombings had been carried out by Islamic extremists inspired by Osama Bin Laden's world outlook.

He argued that the bombings had not come out of the "clear blue sky" - the background was the invasion of Afghanistan, Iraq, photographs of abuses by US troops at Abu Ghraib prison and the continuing confinement of people by America at Guantanamo."

"Mr Galloway linked the deaths of people in London to the deaths of those in Falluja at the hands of coalition forces.
post #55 of 369
Quote:
On what grounds do you make this claim?

The claim was based on the statement from NaplesX - "Like I said, some talking heads in England have already all but made the statement that it's Bush's fault.".

Admitedly, a biased source.

But also, I have seen a lot of British people saying crap like "we invaded Iraq to steal their oil", which reduced the british public in my eyes.

But we have a lot of idiots in the US as well - I will reserve my opinion until I actually hear them blaming GWB with my own ears.
45 2a3 300b 211 845 833
Reply
45 2a3 300b 211 845 833
Reply
post #56 of 369
Quote:
Originally posted by NaplesX
Let me guess, the US?

The west as a whole, but the US now plays the role europe did until half a century ago.
post #57 of 369
Quote:
Originally posted by NaplesX
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/4663313.stm

"On Thursday Mr Galloway said Londoners had paid the price for Iraq and Afghanistan.

He told the Commons it was the US-led coalition's actions in Afghanistan, Iraq and Guantanamo which had inflamed hatred of the West in the Muslim world."

"Earlier Mr Galloway said he was absolutely clear the bombings had been carried out by Islamic extremists inspired by Osama Bin Laden's world outlook.

He argued that the bombings had not come out of the "clear blue sky" - the background was the invasion of Afghanistan, Iraq, photographs of abuses by US troops at Abu Ghraib prison and the continuing confinement of people by America at Guantanamo."

"Mr Galloway linked the deaths of people in London to the deaths of those in Falluja at the hands of coalition forces.

It is interesting how this fellow links in Afghanistan too. Most (reasonable) people that are opposed to or outraged by everything else mentioned are at least reasonable enough to see a direct and justifiable connection between the un-provoked attacks on the U.S. on 9/11 and the U.S. response in Afghanistan.
post #58 of 369
Quote:
On Thursday Mr Galloway said Londoners had paid the price for Iraq and Afghanistan.

Mr Galloway may regret his rash statements, as I imagine that this attack will swing Britan more in favor of the US war on terror and/or Iraq. He still relys on re-election votes.
45 2a3 300b 211 845 833
Reply
45 2a3 300b 211 845 833
Reply
post #59 of 369
Quote:
Originally posted by NaplesX
"On Thursday Mr Galloway said Londoners had paid the price for Iraq and Afghanistan.

Considering the group that claimed responsibility specifically cited that as the motivation...
post #60 of 369
Quote:
Originally posted by NaplesX
Right so it's Bush's fault.

No, that's just you trying to make sense of something you don't understand, like a native who has never seen an airplane and concludes it's the god of the birds.
post #61 of 369
Quote:
Originally posted by NaplesX
Your implication was obviously that the US is at the root of world problems. And to follow the lead of the far-left, it goes without saying that Bush is the person to blame.

Not only did no-one specifically name/blame him in their posts, you've done it youself!

Is this 'opposite day'?
"Many people would sooner die than think; in fact, they do so." - Bertrand Russell
Reply
"Many people would sooner die than think; in fact, they do so." - Bertrand Russell
Reply
post #62 of 369
Quote:
Originally posted by NaplesX
implication

I didn't imply anything, that's just your imagination looking for a way to fit something you don't understand or know about into your belief system, a belief system that relies on taking contemporary political stuctures completely out of context.
Quote:
academia

It's has nothing to do with 'academia.' You don't have to be an academic to know that (and why) uninformed beliefs are consistently wrong.
post #63 of 369
So let's play by the NaplesX playbook, shall we:

The terrorist attacks in London is direct result of liberalism in America. Unpatriotic Americans are directly responsible for the 70 deaths of Londoners. I hope they're proud of themselves.

Isn't that what you're really getting at Naples? I'm sure SDW, Trumpt and Moe are more than eager to back you up on it. I know for a fact Karl Rove is on your side.

So why not just make the claim already?
"The selfishness of Ayn Rand capitalism is the equivalent of intellectual masturbation -- satisfying in an ego-stroking way, but an ethical void when it comes to our commonly shared humanity."
Reply
"The selfishness of Ayn Rand capitalism is the equivalent of intellectual masturbation -- satisfying in an ego-stroking way, but an ethical void when it comes to our commonly shared humanity."
Reply
post #64 of 369
post #65 of 369
I think certain seem to be unable to distinguish between causes-->effect and justifications. Issues like Iraq, or Colonialism or the US in SA or poverty or many other issues are indeed causes for certain acts of terror. There is a connection there and it does have consequences for all parties.

Acknowledging those factors as the background does not mean that people are saying these actions are understandable or justifiable or moral or logical in any way. Terrorist acts are simply irrational, hateful, murderous responses to perceived grievences, some of which are legit and some aren't. Some people may not be able to reconcile that relationship because the resulting reaction of trying to terrorize is essentially unfathomable. But it is still there crazy or not. That is something that needs to be recognized.

Of course we can't decide how to respond based on fear of pissing people off. But likewise we cannot dismiss real issues that have not been dealt with just because some people are responding to them in absurd inhumane ways. At some point some of this stuff has to be addressed. Going after terrorists [within certain necessary limits] is a necessity but you also have to look at the conditions and circumstances that are at the root of the issue if you really want to solve it. And while you can make more headway with social and cultural reform than just a military/law enforcement solution (needed as well). But still, even then, there are 6 billion people out there and low to mid-tech weapons like guns and bombs are available enough that you really can't stop something like Terrorism.
post #66 of 369
Off Topic

Has anyone heard from Seg? Do we know he is ok?
Moe has left the building
Reply
Moe has left the building
Reply
post #67 of 369
After reading through the posts in this thread, I asked myself a question: If the same thing happened in the US, what ramifications would there be?

It was correctly pointed out that, in Spain, the majority of the population was against the Iraq war and they viewed the Madrid bombings as the result of a failed foreign policy. The Old Spanish government was removed and a new one installed on the promise that it would remove Spanish support from Iraq.

In Britain, I believe the numbers also say that a majority of the population is against the war. Tony Blair's government may now be in danger of falling, or at least losing a great deal of support. Whether or not they will accede to the terrorist's demands by pulling out of Iraq, remains to be seen.

Current polls in the US seem to suggest that a majority of Americans believe that going into Iraq was a mistake. Still, I believe that if such attacks were to happen in the US, it would not weaken the Bush government and it would in no way bring US troops back home any sooner. I believe that the American people would rally together and demand that our government get whoever did it. Our government was obviously not up to the task post 9/11, as Osamma and Co. are still out there. The desire, however, on the part of a great many Americans was present. I think it would be the same again.

A demand would be heard to get the perpetrators of the crime. Those politicians who emerge from that conflagration on top, will likely not be those who suggest running from the fight in order to avoid getting sucker punched again, but rather those who would espouse fighting on to whatever end: exactly the opposite of what happened in Spain.

I wonder if this is why there have been no Madrid/London style bombings in the US. Are the terrorists afraid that it would it only strengthen our resolve to carry on? If so, what differs between American and European mentality?

One side might say "Okay, we'll do whatever you say... just don't hit us again", whereas the other might say "I dare you to try that again." I AM NOT implying any degree of cowardice or courage to either stance. I think both are legitimate emotional responses to being victimized. But I find the contrast interesting.

Is there something fundamental to the American psyche that only responds when challenged in such an extreme way? Are we as Americans really at our best only when there is some great adversary to defeat? Is there a strategy by terrorists to attempt to isolate the United States by attacking allies who would reverse their support in response to such an attack? Would such a strategy work on the hearts and minds of Americans to get them to abandon Iraq?
post #68 of 369
Quote:
Originally posted by NaplesX
Right so it's Bush's fault.



Man, you just want SO bad for people to say this, and you're the only one saying it. Over and over and over.
post #69 of 369
Quote:
Originally posted by Moe_in_Texas
Off Topic

Has anyone heard from Seg? Do we know he is ok?

I always thought he was in Spain. Isn't he?
"Many people would sooner die than think; in fact, they do so." - Bertrand Russell
Reply
"Many people would sooner die than think; in fact, they do so." - Bertrand Russell
Reply
post #70 of 369
Quote:
Originally posted by NaplesX
Where are the most corrupt, oppressive and savage parts of the earth located?

Why it's the ME, of course. This was true long before 9/11.

Why is that? Is it simply because of western meddling?

BZZT! I think that Africa takes the title, with pacific asia and the middle east coming in tied for distant second.
45 2a3 300b 211 845 833
Reply
45 2a3 300b 211 845 833
Reply
post #71 of 369
Quote:
Originally posted by Moe_in_Texas
Off Topic

Has anyone heard from Seg? Do we know he is ok?

Last post 7/6/05...
"The Roots of Violence: wealth without work, pleasure without conscience, knowledge without character, commerce without morality, science without humanity, worship without sacrifice, politics...
Reply
"The Roots of Violence: wealth without work, pleasure without conscience, knowledge without character, commerce without morality, science without humanity, worship without sacrifice, politics...
Reply
post #72 of 369
He hasn't posted in any of the London threads.
post #73 of 369
DMZ: thank you for your poem in the other thread. We disagree on much but ... just thanks.

to others: I think your conduct has been despicable, insensitive and shows just how utterly out of touch you are, certainly with the perspective of the Londoner.

Do I think the CIA did this? Do I think Bush knew about it in advance? Does ANYONE but a tiny minority, the size of the militants, think this?

Why do want to put words in our mouths? How can you be so wrong about what we feel about the perpetrators? Why can't you pass up one opportunity to lie about 'talking heads' in the UK, or this 'elite media' that doesn't exist (Rupert Murdoch is a man of the people presumably).

How you can just insult the broadcasters who have managed to totally stay objective and calm, and have during my saturation media consumption done nothing but report the pain and facts we saw yesterday, not even once suggesting blame lay with anyone beyond 'Islamic' terrorists?

Or think you can talk about something of which you are entirely ignorant?
meh
Reply
meh
Reply
post #74 of 369
Quote:
Originally posted by DanMacMan
So instead we leave them alone, pretend they don't exist. Then like a cancer they will grow and become a stronger force until which time we have another 9/11 scale attack. Brilliant.

Wow! I hadn't noticed that those were the ONLY TWO OPTIONS that might come from my statement! If we're not killing terrorists, we MUST therefore be IGNORING them! There's CLEARLY nothing in between!
Gangs are not seen as legitimate, because they don't have control over public schools.
Reply
Gangs are not seen as legitimate, because they don't have control over public schools.
Reply
post #75 of 369
Quote:
Originally posted by midwinter
Wow! I hadn't noticed that those were the ONLY TWO OPTIONS that might come from my statement! If we're not killing terrorists, we MUST therefore be IGNORING them! There's CLEARLY nothing in between!

Mid (or anyone else)...what tactics would you suggest in dealing with these terrorists (and it seems to be the same basic group responsible for the variety of attacks we can think since the early to mid-90's up until yesterday)?
post #76 of 369
Quote:
Originally posted by audiopollution
I always thought he was in Spain. Isn't he?

He seems to move around alot.
Moe has left the building
Reply
Moe has left the building
Reply
post #77 of 369
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally posted by Chris Cuilla
Mid (or anyone else)...what tactics would you suggest in dealing with these terrorists (and it seems to be the same basic group responsible for the variety of attacks we can think since the early to mid-90's up until yesterday)?

It's pretty simple:
You beef up your intelligence services and work with international bodies to police terror cells.

The terrorists are not an army, so fighting them with an army is insane.
proud resident of a failed state
Reply
proud resident of a failed state
Reply
post #78 of 369
Quote:
Originally posted by groverat
It's pretty simple:
You beef up your intelligence services and work with international bodies to police terror cells.

The terrorists are not an army, so fighting them with an army is insane.

Okay...

- Who is to say that we haven't started to "beef up our intelligence services"?

- What "international bodies"? The U.N.?

- What does "police terror cells" mean exactly?
post #79 of 369
So, the consensus so far seems to be that the London attacks are in response to the US/Britain being involved in Afghanistan and Iraq.

But would the US/allies BE in Afghanistan or Iraq if it wasn't for 9/11?
(I know Iraq isn't directly linked to 9/11, but would Bush have had the support for an Iraq invasion without 9/11?)

If you want to play the finger pointing game, both sides are going to wind up going back hundreds if not thousands of years.
(The Crusades, Ottoman Empire and Almohads anyone?)


Regarding Segovius, it does seem odd he hasn't posted in one of the London threads yet...
You need skeptics, especially when the science gets very big and monolithic. -James Lovelock
The Story of Stuff
Reply
You need skeptics, especially when the science gets very big and monolithic. -James Lovelock
The Story of Stuff
Reply
post #80 of 369
Quote:
Originally posted by NaplesX
Spain could not bare the civilian deaths, and thus they handed a victory to the Muslim extremists. This is an attempt to achieve the same in England.

Come on.

Listen fool. I have Spanish relatives and friends. For you to say that the Spanish people got scared by the bombings only speaks of your utter st...ignorance.

If going out MASSIVELY on the streets after the bombings and voting out a candidate who carelessly tried to politicize the bombings by blaming the wrong people is handing a victory to the Muslim extremists....

(edited by audiopollution to remove ad-hom. the member you're addressing has been banned.)
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: PoliticalOutsider
AppleInsider › Forums › Other Discussion › AppleOutsider › PoliticalOutsider › London Terror Attack: Politics