ScooBStu

condoning suicide bombings. I hope someone takes him out.

CoobyS

I can't believe the UK media give these guys the time to spout their rubbish about saying we suffered these attacks because we have tried to help the Iraqi people adopt democracy.

Bubba po

It's because we have the privilege of free speech in this country. perhaps you would like to live in Zimbabwe?

CoobyS

This country is trying so hard to expel these extremists as they influence vulnerable minds to become suicide bombers. Free Speech? More like a soft-touch, PC haven!

Bubba po

But we live in a country where everyone can give their views. Would you like to give up your right to say what you damn well like? Political correctness is the opposite of free speech. On the one hand we get people wittering "No censorship! we can handle complex messages delivered by multiple kinds of media; we are sophisticated enough to be able to tell when we are being indoctrinated or manipulated", then on the other we have "But we can't have this kind of propaganda... weak minds might be indoctrinated".

It's all chauvinistic (in the proper sense) bollox.

unclebuck

Calm down dear.... it's a commercial..

Leslie

CoobyS,

Are you saying that the attack and destruction of Iraq with the consequent continuous terrorist activities have had no influence with respect to our susceptibilty to the bombing and further possible atrocities in this country?

Les

Suresh

I think British activites in Iraq have highlighted that there are UNACCEPTABLE violent, extreme elements in Britain who are more loyal to their religious ideals than to their country. That's rather useful information to have. Giving a toss as to whether a small number of such extreme individuals get upset or not, would be a poor basis for governmental decision-making.

The underlying reasons for acts of treason that result will probably plague acedemics for decades and wont be solved on Scoobynet this week. My own theory and the solution to it is quite simple, but not particuarly helpful.


The existance of such individuals or groups in our midst is now confirmed beyond doubt . The question now is what to do about them. I think the government is tackling that one quite actively through dialogue with the muslim community and only time will tell if they have been successful.

Suresh

Jap2Scrap

But we don't truly have free speech do we.

It seems to be deemed acceptable for an extremist to state that the ordinary person in the street, who had no input or involvement in the processes that led to us going into Iraq, should accept the punishment meted out by fundamentalists. On the other hand I defy one of the average, non-muslim, members of this free society to find yourself a soapbox and state that it's acceptable for the 1.5million muslims in the UK to now face hatred and aggression on the streets because a handful of muslims bombed our capital.

It's not a two way street.

Lord Acton once said (something along the lines of) "You can judge the freedom of a country by the level of security afforded to its minorities." I just wish he'd defined 'security' because, to me at least, the minorities have more security to act and speak as they choose than the majority.

lightning101

Totally agree. About time someone said this.

ScoobyAddict

Could not have put it any better myself!
Cannot even think of anything intelligent or constructive to add really as this sums up my thoughts & feelings exactly!

CoobyS

I think that is being used as an excuse by the terrorists. They know full well that if we didn't invade Iraq then we'd face the economic repercussions of an oil crisis, almost like in 1973 when the US nearly invaded Saudi Arabia. Also, in invading Iraq, we are helping them rid their way of life and adopt the Western demoncracy approach - the only way to live. Mark my words, 5 years from now we will see Iraqis enjoying Big Macs rather than strapping exposives to themselves and needlessly blowing themselves up.

All we're doing is helping them.

CoobyS

Exactly! Much in the same way we have the ordinary Iraqi who wanted the war so they could be liberated and now they complain that the West has killed over 25,000 innocent civilians.

astraboy

you dont seriously believe that do you?
Iraq was invaded because of its oil reserves were ripe for the taking.
Everything else, the repression of the kurds, the human rights atrocities and a despot running the place were all incidental to the fact the country is rich in oil and the americans wanted it. A fact reflected by the way american forces surrounded the oil ministry to defend its infastructure once it had been captured, yet didnt bat an eyelid while the hospitals were looted.
If the americans were so upset about the treatment of the natives, it does beg the question of why they hung the kurds out to dry and stood to one side while saddam hussein gassed them en masse for daring to stage an uprising in the north after Gulf War Part 1.
astraboy.

OllyK

The problem is we assume the western way is best and right, that isn't necessarily the case for everybody and while we impose our will on others, people will resist and make their displeasure known however they can. Iraq is just another example of the west (America) meddling in the Middle East for largely its own ends and we just happen to be along for the ride this time.

America is THE super power, no other army can really match them in terms of destructive capability, so those who want to resist have to resort to non-conventional methods, much as the French resistance did during the German invasion in WW2. We have to realise that to many people in Iraq and the Middle East in general, what we are doing is seen as comparable to Germany.

CoobyS

I think British invasion in Iraq has highlighted that there are UNACCEPTABLE violent, extreme countries like Britain who are more interested in oil rather than internation peace. That's rather useful information to have. Giving a toss as to whether 25,000+ innocent civillians get killed or not, would be a poor basis for governmental decision-making.

The underlying reasons for acts of invasion that result will probably plague acedemics for decades and wont be solved on Scoobynet this week. My own theory and the solution to it is quite simple, but not particuarly helpful.


The existance of such governments in our midst is now confirmed beyond doubt . The question now is what to do about them. I think the Iraqi people is tackling that one quite actively through begging for their lives and posing in photos with the US/UK troops and only time will tell if they have been successful.

Leslie

The situation is a lot deeper than you are seeing CoobyS.

You are making a gross assumption that the Iraqi's want a system based on Western democracy. How do you know that they would not really prefer a feudal style of government with a benign dictator? Obviously they were not too happy with the likes of a murdering leader like SH, but does Western style government really suit them? They have a completely different mindset to those of us in the West and it is elitist to assume that our system is best for them and that we should therefore force it upon them. If that is what they want then they will introduce it for themselves without pressure from Bush and Billy-boy.

The illegal war has stirred up a hornet's nest both by the destruction of the country and the slaying of so many innocent civilians, and by giving the evil factions an excuse to continue to murder innocent Iraqi's and the security forces in order to undermine any chance of Iraq governing itself effectively, and a power base from which to plan further attacks on the West.

This sort of festering misery is ideal for whipping up more serious feeling against the West.

Les

CoobyS

Right. So would you say that the UK's involvement in Iraq, albeit as a pillion passenger, has made us the target of terrorists? In other words, we are responsible, ultimately, for the terror attacks on 7/7?

OllyK

I don't think anything in the real world is quite that black or white. IMO our involvement in Iraq and our relationship with the USA was a significant contributory factor. As we will never be able to question the bombers and get to the bottom of their motivation, it is a bit of a moot point. We should however, try to avoid antagonising other countries unnecessarily, that's just good manners.

suprabeast

im not responsible for any of it, so dont include me in your "we are responsible"

petey

yep w4nkers!

CoobyS

'We' may not be responsible, but 'we' are a target.

The Iraqi people are not responsible for the war, but they are a target.

suprabeast

iraqi people didnt bomb us...some other nuts did

suprabeast

and iraqi people weren't a target anyway, they may have got in the way but we didnt go in there killing them all for no reason

CoobyS

Don't they inadvertantly become targets? I mean 25,000+ civillian deaths is bound to p1ss a few people off of would be looking for revenge.

CoobyS

But we bombed the Iraq people.

suprabeast

no we bombed targets...

CoobyS

OK. The Iraqi's died of shock. All 25,000 of them

suprabeast

glad you're such a smartass... people get in the way in conflict situations, unfortunately in war lives are lost. BUT at NO point did british forces go in and kill innocent civilians that were no threat. So you can NOT compare that to suicide bombings in london

CoobyS

The common denominator is that innocent lives are lost and people get p1ssed off. In the same way we are p1ssed off at our fellow Londoners getting blown to bits, so are the Iraqi's (and their supporters) who have seen their people die.

I take it that you support the war in Iraq?