Notices
Non Scooby Related Anything Non-Scooby related

War On Terror - This is what we're up against.

Thread Tools
 
Search this Thread
 
Old 18 July 2005, 02:17 PM
  #1  
unclebuck
Scooby Regular
Thread Starter
 
unclebuck's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Talk to the hand....
Posts: 13,331
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default War On Terror - This is what we're up against.

The Chatham House and Economic and Social Research Council paper says the Iraq war has boosted al-Qaeda. It said the Iraq invasion, in which the UK had been "pillion" passenger, had damaged the counter-terrorism campaign.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/4692861.stm

Seems kind of obvious to me, but then you get:

Senior Cabinet ministers have rejected a report's claims that supporting the invasion of Iraq put the UK more at risk from terrorist attack.

Until this government gets it's collective head out of George Bush's **** what chance will we ever have of curing terrorist attacks?? They really have lost the plot

UB
Old 18 July 2005, 02:23 PM
  #2  
OllyK
Scooby Regular
 
OllyK's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Derbyshire
Posts: 12,304
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default

But Foreign Secretary Jack Straw and Defence Secretary John Reid said there had also been attacks before the war.
So - can anybody tell me when the last al-Qaeda attack on the British mainland was before the 7th July, because I'm buggered if I can remember?
Old 18 July 2005, 02:27 PM
  #3  
moses
BANNED
Support Scoobynet!
 
moses's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: scotland home of the brave
Posts: 13,927
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Talking

Originally Posted by OllyK
So - can anybody tell me when the last al-Qaeda attack on the British mainland was before the 7th July, because I'm buggered if I can remember?

i think they mean the 9/11 ones
Old 18 July 2005, 02:33 PM
  #4  
OllyK
Scooby Regular
 
OllyK's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Derbyshire
Posts: 12,304
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by moses
i think they mean the 9/11 ones
Maybe, but I wasn't aware of the UK getting direct Al-Q attacks prior to us waltzing in to Iraq with Bush's **** up our a$$.
Old 18 July 2005, 02:45 PM
  #5  
peterpeter
Scooby Regular
 
peterpeter's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2005
Posts: 150
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default

on the day of the london attack, Blair very quickly gave his " Islamic fundamemtalism attacking our way of life"- speech.

We all know that many of the leaders of Alqaeeda probably believe that crap and want to convert the west.

But the foot soldiers start off as normal well adjusted people and someohow get converted into these psychopaths.

To say that somehow Iraq had nothing to do with it is almost admitting guilt from the start, becasue only a ****ing moron would buy that argument.

Anyone caring to do a little research into alqaueeda recruiting material wil see that IRAQ is ised as one of the main reasons to join them.


Now I am not argueing about the wronsg and rights of the war..that is another thread.

But, if Blair had had any sense in his stupid gullible little brain he would have just let the US go it alone into iraq. and distanced us from them.

What benefit have we seen from invading Iraq as a nation? Its not as even as if fuel is cheaper here. We got dragged in by a very persuasive US, when they could have done the job themselves and suffered the consequences too thmeselves.

Such comments from Blair and Clarke, are unbelievable but not surprising for arseholes like them.
Old 18 July 2005, 02:51 PM
  #6  
khany
Scooby Regular
 
khany's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2004
Posts: 159
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default

Good article here:

http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.p...&articleId=146
Old 18 July 2005, 05:49 PM
  #7  
pslewis
Scooby Regular
 
pslewis's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: Old Codgers Home
Posts: 32,398
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
Default

Anyone who thinks we wouldn't be a target if we didn't line up with the toughest guy in town, are, like UB sadly - badly - madly mistaken!

Pete
Old 18 July 2005, 06:12 PM
  #8  
camk
Scooby Regular
 
camk's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2000
Posts: 1,764
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by unclebuck
The Chatham House and Economic and Social Research Council paper says the Iraq war has boosted al-Qaeda. It said the Iraq invasion, in which the UK had been "pillion" passenger, had damaged the counter-terrorism campaign.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/4692861.stm

Seems kind of obvious to me, but then you get:

Senior Cabinet ministers have rejected a report's claims that supporting the invasion of Iraq put the UK more at risk from terrorist attack.

Until this government gets it's collective head out of George Bush's **** what chance will we ever have of curing terrorist attacks?? They really have lost the plot

UB

Its pretty clear that Iraq is being used as an excuse by Al-Queda, they have been blown out of Afganistan and are using Iraq as an excuse to continue its war agains the west. The real issue is the perceived US/Western interference in Middle East politics by these nutters, if it was not Iraq then it would be some other **** poor excuse.
Its not Americans or British soldiers who are bombing civilians and policemen in Iraq.....Do we see the same negativity towards Iraq despite them waging a full scale war agains Iraq resulting in millions of dead...of course not.
We are in Iraq like it or not, we cannot leave as we have the place in turmoil, we need to get it stable then get out.
Old 18 July 2005, 06:23 PM
  #9  
unclebuck
Scooby Regular
Thread Starter
 
unclebuck's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Talk to the hand....
Posts: 13,331
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by peterpeter

But, if Blair had had any sense in his stupid gullible little brain he would have just let the US go it alone into iraq. and distanced us from them.
Like the French did. They got it right they haven't been bombed.

Such comments from Blair and Clarke, are unbelievable but not surprising for arseholes like them.
Don't forget that muppet Jack Straw as well.

I can't believe there haven't been loud and sustained calls for Blair an Co's resignation since the bombings. All this 'united front' and cross party support stuff is crap IMO.
Old 18 July 2005, 06:28 PM
  #10  
turboman786
Scooby Regular
 
turboman786's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Posts: 2,458
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by camk
Its not Americans or British soldiers who are bombing civilians and policemen in Iraq......

Errmm...I think you'll find that tens of thousands of civilians have been killed by bombs dropped by US/UK forces, and by trigger happy yanks/brits.....sure, not all have died as a result of UK/US troops...but a helluva lot have.
Old 18 July 2005, 06:38 PM
  #11  
camk
Scooby Regular
 
camk's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2000
Posts: 1,764
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by turboman786
Errmm...I think you'll find that tens of thousands of civilians have been killed by bombs dropped by US/UK forces, and by trigger happy yanks/brits.....sure, not all have died as a result of UK/US troops...but a helluva lot have.

yes and even more by Iran in the past or by the old regime but we don't see anything being done by Al-Quaida in Iran or against Saddam......
Old 18 July 2005, 06:44 PM
  #12  
Taff107
Scooby Regular
 
Taff107's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Hants
Posts: 1,489
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by camk
yes and even more by Iran in the past or by the old regime but we don't see anything being done by Al-Quaida in Iran or against Saddam......
.....careful camk, some of the people like to ignore this fact......
Old 18 July 2005, 07:48 PM
  #13  
MJW
Scooby Senior
 
MJW's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: West Yorks.
Posts: 4,130
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by camk
The real issue is the perceived US/Western interference in Middle East politics by these nutters, if it was not Iraq then it would be some other **** poor excuse.
Well before Iraq was flattened we didn't seem to have a suicide bomber problem ...

And western interference in middle east politics isn't perceived, its a fact. Right back to the first invasion of Iraq in 1917 by the British (where General Sir Aylmer Haldane was purported to have used chemical weapons to subdue the locals). Also lets not be forgetting small things such as the US support for the mujahadeen during the Afghanistan / Soviet war, the Iran contra affair plus the approval of numerous acts of state terrorism by Israel against the Palestinians.

So the Chatham House report, while it's obviously been rejected by the government (while they desperately try to cling onto credibility over the issue) comes as absolutely no surprise whatsoever to the rest of us with even a modicum of intelligence.
Old 18 July 2005, 08:17 PM
  #14  
Shy Muppet
Scooby Regular
 
Shy Muppet's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: Dancing around a maypole in the New Forest waving 6 fairy tokens in the air!
Posts: 2,503
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by unclebuck
Like the French did. They got it right they haven't been bombed.

... yet.

And look at the reputation France has right now (apart from being bedfellows with Germany). People dispise the French even more now because of their cowardise. And lets not forget that it wasn't a "noble" reason for not getting involved. They stood to loose a awful lot of money in trade (secret or otherwise) if they got involved.
Old 18 July 2005, 09:02 PM
  #15  
camk
Scooby Regular
 
camk's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2000
Posts: 1,764
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by MJW
Well before Iraq was flattened we didn't seem to have a suicide bomber problem ...

And western interference in middle east politics isn't perceived, its a fact. Right back to the first invasion of Iraq in 1917 by the British (where General Sir Aylmer Haldane was purported to have used chemical weapons to subdue the locals). Also lets not be forgetting small things such as the US support for the mujahadeen during the Afghanistan / Soviet war, the Iran contra affair plus the approval of numerous acts of state terrorism by Israel against the Palestinians.

So the Chatham House report, while it's obviously been rejected by the government (while they desperately try to cling onto credibility over the issue) comes as absolutely no surprise whatsoever to the rest of us with even a modicum of intelligence.
Do you think theses guys give a flying **** about what happened in 1917, its clear we have an ideological difference here that some people are willing to blow themselves up over it.
What would your proposal be now MJM, given the Government were given pretty broad backing by Parliament. If I remember correctly around the same time as the plane attacks in the US there was reputed to have been an aborted mission planned in London. So its not an entirely new situation, the fact that its people born and brought up in the UK that appear to have perpetuated it is disturbing.

I thought the case for the war was weak, however we're where we are and the job needs to be finished. Given the fact that these Islamic madmen were previously deadly enemies with Saddam seems to have been forgotten by them and others. As I said before the Iraq link is just a convenient flagship. That is my main argument here, the rights and wrongs of the war are another debate, however Al-Quaida don't give a toss about Iraq.
Old 18 July 2005, 09:04 PM
  #16  
Suresh
Scooby Regular
 
Suresh's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2000
Posts: 4,622
Received 2 Likes on 1 Post
Talking At last a call for resignation!

!
Originally Posted by unclebuck
I can't believe there haven't been loud and sustained calls for Unclebuck's resignation since the bombings. All this "I forgot how naiive I was" stuff is crap IMO.
I say you should resign and give someone else a chance to play the broken record... All IMO of course..

S.
Old 18 July 2005, 09:30 PM
  #17  
GCollier
Scooby Regular
 
GCollier's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 1998
Posts: 1,198
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by unclebuck
Seems kind of obvious to me
Was it obvious to you a couple of months ago when you were posting your lame cartoons implying any terrorist threat was a fabrication by the government?

Iraq is just convenient recruitment propaganda for extremists who want to impose their own minority beliefs upon the majority. Yes, the invasion undoubtedly made an attack in Britain more likely, but only because it made it easier for those would already welcome the West's destruction to manipulate the minds of impressionable pawns.

Gary.
Old 18 July 2005, 10:16 PM
  #18  
imi
Scooby Regular
 
imi's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: London
Posts: 537
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default

Do people seriously believe that These fanatics are out there to convert us, to change our way of life.....BOLLOCKS.

I dont remember them attacking any of the scandanavian countries.......

Now if wed get ourselves out of Bushes ****, I can see us making progress.
Old 19 July 2005, 12:03 AM
  #19  
moses
BANNED
Support Scoobynet!
 
moses's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: scotland home of the brave
Posts: 13,927
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default

anyone watch the newsnight documentary today

even when saddam was their but the arab people shia or sunni

never ever called themselves sunni or shia just iraqis or described themselves of northern iraqis or southern etc etc

it was the americans who split them into cities and politics and segretated them

this was the british documentary guys made for the bbc
Old 19 July 2005, 07:57 AM
  #20  
Dracoro
Scooby Regular
 
Dracoro's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2001
Location: A powerslide near you
Posts: 10,261
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default

Well, the suicide bombers must be Saddam Hussein's fault as if he hadn't treated his country as he did then we wouldn't have declared war and not had suicide bombers.

Anyway to delare that it's 'our' own fault is daft or are we suggesting that we shouldn't have stood up to Hitler as he would have bombed us otherwise?
Old 19 July 2005, 07:58 AM
  #21  
Leslie
Scooby Regular
 
Leslie's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Posts: 39,877
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default

You can say how unimportant events in 1917 are but the point is that events always come back on you eventually when you do something wrong.

We had the same problems with the Irish troubles and that may not be finished yet for all we know.

This latest gross error by the government in spite of enormously strong protests by the people will be remembered for many years to come. We shall always be the country who attacked a country illegally and sided with the US which is universally hated in that region.

We have focussed that hate upon ourselves and I feel that the bombing we have seen may only be the start. The destruction of Iraq has given the excuse to include us in the kind of attention which will plague us for a very long time.

Les
Related Topics
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
druddle
ScoobyNet General
2
17 September 2001 01:04 PM
Neil Smalley
ScoobyNet General
38
14 September 2001 07:42 PM



Quick Reply: War On Terror - This is what we're up against.



All times are GMT +1. The time now is 09:51 AM.