Terror linked to the war?

[toddbabe]

What is wrong with these people? I watched in absolute horror this morning as Andrew Marr interviewed the new unelected PM, what an idiot! any hope of him being any better than the last tosser quickly went out of the window.
Incredulously he is still firmly of the belief that there is no link between our foreign policy and closeness to GWB and the increased threat that we face from extremists! recent events in London and Glasgow further support the fact that we are a major target for terror.
Brown claims that we would be a target regardless because of our social values and the way that we live! if this was the case then why isn't France targeted? aren't they largely the same type of People as us with liberal open views? I don't here of Germay being targeted, in fact in the past many of their own muslims have been exporting their beliefs and bombs to us and America but not to their host country!
Spain was for a few years a legitimate target, but perhaps coincidentally since they have withdrawn troops from Iraq they haven't suffered again.
The common denominator in all these incidents is our foreign policy and the utterly misguided participation in Two pointless wars that serve only Two purposes as far as I can see
1. The worry and misery of every partner or parent of loved ones deployed.
2. fuel the hatred and anger of Muslims worldwide, to unite and focus their hatred towards the good people of Britian.

Gordon Brown is supposedly a clever man, he is clearly an ambitious man and if he has any ambitions beyond the next election, and more
importantly if he cares at all for the safety of those that may or may not vote for him one day then he should get his head out of the sand thumb out of his arse and change our foreign policy.:mad:

[TorqueOfTheDevil]

How true. Twas a sad day last month when one of the Democratic presidential hopefuls dared to opine in a televised debate that the terrorist threat to the US was a result of American foreign policy, only for him to be shouted down by another candidate - who then received a standing ovation IIRC. Clearly the Yanks are as unwilling to face the truth as our own dear government...

[WorkingHard]

On the same sort of topic, did it not occur to "the governing classes" that the honour bestowed on Salman Rushdie (for what?) may be a factor and why oh! why can we not deport the unwanted potential terrorists instead of asking them to report daily to a police station?

[MrFlibble]

Lest we forget... we the British created both Pakistan, and Israel. Of course, our current foreign policy isnt helping things, thats a given.

However, Im pretty sure that even if we packed up from the 'Stan and the Sandpit, brought all of our boys home, withdrew support for Israel and the US, AND took Rushdie's knighthood away...

...there would still be attacks on this country, probably for the reasons detailed above.

[Melchett01]

TB,
To be fair, he does have a point. But only up to a point. Islamic extremism isn't new, just look at the 1972 Olympics and UBL was around and kicking and on the various radars (albeit as a peripheral, long way off we don't need to worry to much about this guy now character) well before 9/11.

If you look back to Afghanistan when it was the Mujahideen fighting the Russians, there was still a lot of anti-western feeling. Why do you think a lot of the weapons and finances from CIA, SIS and various other govts and agencies went via Pakistan? Both because it wouldn't be great for us to be seen funding the Muj. but also because your average fighter was less than enthusiastic about the decadent west and receiving help from them was a bit galling.

So in some ways, our decadent western infidel lifestyle has always been at odds with the hardline Islamic viewpoint and was always likely to lead to tension between them and the west. Invading 2 Islamic countries in the space of 2 years has hardly helped matters - that I will grant you!

[knowitall]

"if this was the case then why isn't France targeted?"

well there's the airbus high-jacking in 1994 for starters

"The common denominator in all these incidents is our foreign policy and the utterly misguided participation in Two pointless wars that serve only Two purposes as far as I can see"

so how do you explain the events of september the 11th 2001, which last time i checked occoured before the invasions of Iraq and afghanistan

the Invasion of Iraq hasn't helped to diminish the terrorist threat we face, but to claim it Caused it in the first place is simplistic nonsense

i wouldn't describe afghanistan as pointless in its self, but our governments insistance on trying to do the job on a shoestring is

[TorqueOfTheDevil]

the Invasion of Iraq hasn't helped to diminish the terrorist threat we face, but to claim it Caused it in the first place is simplistic nonsense


Has anyone actually claimed this (in this thread at least)?

Al Qa'eda have been attacking the US for years (the first WTC bombing in ?1993, and the bombings at US Embassies in Nairobi and Dar es Salaam). The UK didn't seem to feature on their radar (not enough to attack us, at least), until our staunch and unilateral (virtually) support for Dubya's invasion of Iraq which seemed to change all that...strange really...

[ORAC]

Spain was for a few years a legitimate target, but perhaps coincidentally since they have withdrawn troops from Iraq they haven't suffered again. Maybe you should read up on Al Qaeda's long term aims of restoring the Caliphate. Iran and Afghanistan are certainly recruiting sergeants for Al Qaeda, but there were around long before it, and will br around long after we ever withdraw. They have aims of their own - and Spain will remain in the sights for other reasons....

Spanish police arrested 15 suspected Islamic terrorists in May, another 22 were arrested a few months ago. In all, Spain has arrested more than 100 since the Madrid train bombings in 2004. Most of the arrests have been related to the train bombings, but there have also been detentions for a plot to blow up the Madrid courthouse where those accused of the train bombs are being tried. Most of those arrested nationwide have been of Moroccan or Algerian origin, with residency permits, and having lived in Spain for months or years before their arrests.

26/06/2007 - Spain arrests two al Qaeda suspects (http://www.ireland.com/newspaper/breaking/2007/0626/breaking62.htm)

Spanish police have arrested two Moroccans suspected of having links to al Qaeda and recruiting people to send to training camps in Africa.

Police said in a statement they had detained Mohamed Laksir, 23, and Moulay Lahoucine Miftah Idrissi, 27, in Barcelona under international warrants lodged by Moroccan authorities, who want them extradited. The Spanish police said the two men were linked to al Qaeda Organisation in the Islamic Maghreb, previously known as the Salafist Group for Preaching and Combat (GSPC). Police said the pair were suspected of recruiting people and indoctrinating them with radical Islamic ideas in order to send them to training camps in the Sahel region.

Since the mainly Algerian GSPC rebranded itself in January as al Qaeda's North African arm, counter-terrorism officials have warned it might expand its ambitions to include parts of Europe as well.

France's top anti-terrorism investigator Jean-Louis Bruguiere told Reuters in an interview this month he was concerned the group might try to extend its network into France, Spain and Italy, which have large North African communities......

26th June - Spain arrests two Moroccan Al Qaeda suspects (http://www.khaleejtimes.com/DisplayArticleNew.asp?xfile=data/theworld/2007/June/theworld_June817.xml&section=theworld&col=)

Al Qaeda-linked fighters are being training in countries in the region such as Mali, Niger and Mauritania.

In a statement claiming responsibility for the Algeria bombings in April, Al Qaeda said it wants to reconquer Al Andalus, the Moorish name for Spain which was partly ruled by Muslims for centuries until 1492. It also said it aimed to end the ‘occupation’ of Ceuta and Melilla, two Spanish enclaves on Morocco’s northern coast.

[Caspian237]

Hey. Many opponents of the current government attribute Britain's increased threat to its role in the war in terror. In the case of Iraq in particular, it is implied that this situation is Blair's fault. Maybe that is true, I don't know enough to make comment. However, the war in Afghanistan was widely supported by the United Nations (it still is) and our forces are there by mandate.

Would Blair's opponents be attacking him so passionately if we had only got involved in Afghanistan? Who is to say that these mad bombers would not still feel justified in their actions over the Afghanistan issue alone? Is that not where their hero, Bin laden, was hiding while issuing threats of retaliation for the fall of the Taliban?

At the end of the day, nobody can say either way, but I think it is worth considering at least.

[Load Toad]

so how do you explain the events of september the 11th 2001, which last time i checked occured before the invasions of Iraq and afghanistan

Do you really think the USA foreign policy prior to the September 11th terrorist attacks left no reason at all for he extremists to feel aggrieved.
Do you read any history at all or chose to bury your head in the sand?
Lets just start for the sake of it with Operation Ajax in Iran in '53 was it? Or maybe the support for Iraq when the Ayatollah Khomeni came to power in Iran. Or maybe the support for Israel? Maybe we should go further back and look at the broken promises to the Arabs after the First World War?
Come on - wakey wakey!

[Blacksheep]

Al Qa'eda have been attacking the US for years (the first WTC bombing in ?1993, and the bombings at US Embassies in Nairobi and Dar es Salaam). The UK didn't seem to feature on their radar (not enough to attack us, at least), until our staunch and unilateral (virtually) support for Dubya's invasion of Iraq which seemed to change all that...strange really...Al Qaeda springs from the "Muslim Brotherhood" movement that began as an opposition to Nasser's corrupt, secular Egyptian government. The movement was strengthened by Egypt's signing of a peace treaty with Israel - an event that led directly to the assassination of President Assad by the Brotherhood. The movement also gained a foothold in Saudi Arabia amongst Islamic opponents of the corrupt and avowedly pro-western Saudi government. Al Qaeda and The Muslim Brotherhood's anti-western stand is based upon the creation of and continuing support for the state of Israel and the west's support of the Saudi regime.

The first Gulf War and the use of Saudi Arabia as a base for US led forces inflamed the Saudi extremists in particular, with Al Qaeda rising to leadership of "the cause" and leading directly to the attacks upon the World Trade Centre. The fight against the Taliban and the invasion of Iraq are not the cause of terrorism - although they do contribute to terrorist propaganda - but pulling out of Iraq and Afghanistan would do nothing to end terrorism, because the original root causes remain.

[Pontius Navigator]

Load Toad, and more recently the enforcement of the no-fly zones with the benign occupation of the gulf States for 10 years. That was a running sore too.

[Wiley]

Sorry guys, but even accepting that our Lords and Masters have made more than a few clanger decisions over the last few years (decades?), quite a few of you are sounding awfully like that thorough gentleman Mr Chamberlain, saying the modern day equivalent of "If we just give Herr Hitler what he wants, (pick your Eastern European country as he gobbled up more and more after each act of appeasement by the West), he'll leave us alone."

Spain's been left alone since its people capitulated to a terrorist act? Well it may have been, but the other side have already announced that they consider Spain to be part of the Caliphate, stolen from its rightful owners, the Moors (=Arabs) by El Cid and his Christian armies some 600 odd years ago.

But it isn't real estate these people are after, it's souls - yours and mine - and owning the real estate is simply the easiest way of imposing the life they believe (know, with the certainty of the zealot) is best for all of us - whether we like it or not.

The three B's, (BushBlair'n'nowBrown) might be in denial, but I daresay they know, thanks to a few briefings from some very clever people who haven't had their findings altered to suit the political climate of the day, that for whatever reason, we're now in a battle for survival.

And since we've already mentioned Spain, it's probably worth mentionibng that it was in the Spanish Civil War that the term "5th Column" was created, and thanks to the policies of (some would say, with the benefit of 20/20 hindsight, very misguided) policies of past and current Western governments, we've currently got outrselves a doozy of a 5th Column within all countries of the West.

And appeasing that 5th Column and the "4" or more outside our borders will be as effective (ie, NOT) as the same policy was against Herr Hitler.

[Load Toad]

I'm getting a bit sick of this - anytime I (we) point out the failings of our politicians people seem to think that means we condone or worse support terrorism.

No we don't.

[Not_a_boffin]

For those querying why we weren't attacked prior to HERRICK & TELIC, you might consider the policing and security regime (put in place by both brands of pollies) that led to London being referred to as Londonistan. In the name of inclusion and multi-culturalism (and probably a couple more isms that no-one has thought of yet) a particular group of folk were allowed to publicly call for the most gruesome acts against the west and the Red Sea pedestrians without any fear of consequences. In my book there's a difference between free speech and incitement to murder. ISTR the French have had a couple of Metro-based incidents over the last few years as well, despite their anti-GWB proclivities.

Toad - would not suggest for one mo that the critics of Bliar and Bush policy (with the possible exception of the WMF) condone or support terrorism. Just a difference of opinion - some believe if we leave them alone, they'll reciprocate, others (including me) believe that they will come after the West regardless.

[nigegilb]

Not sure that everyone understands the full meaning of "unification." Muslims seek unification. Fundamentalists reject the laws of their host country and seek to replace them with a form of sharia law. 5th column accurately describes the current situation. We are heading for big trouble. Iraq and Afg have merely boosted recruitment. This is a theological war and UK Govt is terrified of some kind of backlash developing.

Read this telling article written by Hassan Butt about the British Jihadi Movement. They used to laugh when hearing people blame the Iraq War for domestic difficulties- a real eye opener.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/terrorism/story/0,,2115889,00.html

[AR1]

The 'faith' or beliefs being held by the protaganists of this wave of violence, know no boundarys - its not about countries or borders. Its about the propogation of a faith.
The removal of troops from iraq would simply lead to different branches of faith killing each other. Preferable you may say to them killing us, but I persoanlly dont think we're off the hook which ever way we go.

[GOLF_BRAVO_ZULU]

Spain was for a few years a legitimate target

I know it's now out of context but you didn't mean that did you?

The way I see it is that we will need to confront these buggers sooner or later if we are to preserve our own British way of life (I feel a Churchill speech coming on). I suggest it is better to do it sooner while we still have the will and capability.

If yer man Brown is so keen on defining and promoting Britishness, maybe he should attend more to the true means of preserving it.

[Wader2]

Remember the PM is instituting an anti-terrorist and homeland security revue, not a Defence revue.

Is it conveivable that the Armed forces could be realigned as homeland security services?

Lots of light grey armed coastal defence vessels and revenue cutters?

Airport perimeter security, armoured cars and all?

Event cordon parties?

Random checkpoints for ID checks?

Dockland patrols?

Our present armed forces would protest but in time you would still have shedloads of volunteers for the motherland security service.

[Not_a_boffin]

Defence revue

Is this some sort of coastal waters Sods Opera? Or are we talking about rescreening It Ain't Half Hot Mum........That'd get the little b8ggers running for cover.

[Wader2]

NAB,

Fair cop, but an accurate spoonerism maybe.

[AR1]

Or are we talking about rescreening It Ain't Half Hot Mum........

The way we're going it'll be a re-run of "Get Some In!"

[toddbabe]

GBZ No I didn't mean that they are legitimate for us to attack!!!!! not unless they harp on about Gib again:}
Clearly I am being simplistic in a very complex argument, as pointed out there are many reasons for anti-west attacks but for People like Blair and now Brown to dismiss the part our foreign policy has played is both stupid and patronising to those of us who know beter!

[Selac66]

Blacksheep,

To add to the Al Qaeda thing. The term Al Qaeda was first used (to describe a structured terrorist organisation) by FBI Investigators in connection with the African Embassy bombings of 1998. Bin Laden only used this name after September 11, 2001. In 1998 (while the US Intelligence guys rolled out 'Al Qaeda') he called his group the rather less media friendly 'World Islamic Front for Jihad against the Jews and Crusaders'.

Who is the threat to the UK?

Hamas? - No, Palestinian cause. Israel helped to create it.

Hezbollah - No, Lebanese resistance movement sparked by Israeli occupation of Lebanon.

Baathists - No, Secular political party. Founded by a Christian. Fighting the occupiers, annoyed about losing power.

The Taliban - Aka Mujahadeen. Fighting the occupiers (who is it this year?)

Iran - Minding their own business (note that this includes what is happening to their neighbours). Haven't forgiven the yanks for Op AJAX.

All of these players have a mission but it's not the Islamisation of the world.

Al Qaeda - if any truly organised group exists - may have dreams of this but its 18 000 members may have a bit of a task ahead of them if they want to win power in the British elections.

[samuraimatt]

It is worrying to think that these terrorists are not the archetypal angry young Muslims with no job and no hope. They were highly-paid professionals with a prestigious career. Does this then cast potential suspicion on almost anyone within the Muslim community? Looks like the Holy Qur'an trumped the hippocratic oath to these people. But does the Holy Qur'an say that they can kill indiscriminately? I bet there is no mention of a jeep cherokee in there.

[ORAC]

You know, I never even realised Yemen had been part of the coalition......

Suicide Bomber at Yemeni Temple Kills 9
Monday July 2, 2007 6:46 PM
AHMED Al-HAJJ

SAN'A, Yemen (AP) - An al-Qaida suicide bomber blew himself up Monday at the site of an ancient temple popular with tourists, killing seven Spaniards and two Yemenis........

Witnesses said the bomber drove a car through the gate of the temple compound, and the vehicle exploded near the structure, which was built about 3,000 years ago and dedicated to the Queen of Sheba................