Explosion heard in London - political part

[lord of the mark]

Originally posted by GePap


Yeah, cuase out there in the real world you see so much intelligent debate and people changing their minds...

Res ipso loquitur.


Ive seen intelligent debate and the changing of minds in the real world, and even here.

[lord of the mark]

Originally posted by Ramo


I'd say that the comments are morally comparable (I don't know if Red Ken has given terrorists any material help).

although thinking about it, Reagan never admitted that the contras had commited atrocities, IIRC. What happened in some border coffee colective was always deniable, IIRC. Hamas, on the other hand, celebrates its terror bombings. So while Reagans policies were bad, and worthy of opposition, Im not sure we're in moral equivalency territory here.

Im not saying that denial of a provable fact eliminates its moral weight, but I am saying that part of what is reprehensible about contemporary terrorism is its assertion of the RIGHTNESS of the murder of innocents.

[Ramo]

Well, if you go that route, it looks like Red Ken has been an apologist for someone who advocates terrorism, rather than advocating terrorism himself (according to my googling).

As for policies rather than words, Ronnie's were undoubtedly worse, as AFAIK, Red Ken hasn't been giving any terrorists any material support.

[Shi Huangdi]

Whether or not you agreed with the Iraq war to begin with, there is now a battle in Iraq between those who want a democracy, and those who want either a return to brutal Sunni minority rule or a Taliban style state. If those wanting a democracy don't win, it will not only be a disaster for the Iraqi people, but Iraq may then also become the next major base for international terrorism where they are allowed to train freely.

It's true any one country can take itself momentarily out of the way of the conflict by withdrawing from Iraq. But for defeating this menace in the long run the best course of action is to keep of fighting in Iraq until the Iraqi government is able to handle the country on it's own.

[lord of the mark]

Originally posted by Ramo
Well, if you go that route, it looks like Red Ken has been an apologist for someone who advocates terrorism, rather than advocating terrorism himself (according to my googling).

As for policies rather than words, Ronnie's were undoubtedly worse, as AFAIK, Red Ken hasn't been giving any terrorists any material support.

to get back on topic, heres what Red Ken said, with a comment by Andrew Sullivan:

"This was not a terrorist attack against the mighty and the powerful; it is not aimed at presidents or prime ministers; it was aimed at ordinary working class Londoners, black and white, Muslim and Christians, Hindu and Jew, young and old, indiscriminate attempt at slaughter irrespective of any considerations, of age, of class, of religion, whatever, that isn't an ideology, it isn't even a perverted faith, it's just indiscriminate attempt at mass murder, and we know what the objective is, they seek to divide London. They seek to turn Londoners against each other and Londoners will not be divided by this cowardly attack... I wish to speak through you directly, to those who came to London to claim lives, nothing you do, how many of us you kill will stop that flight to our cities where freedom is strong and where people can live in harmony with one another, whatever you do, how many you kill, you will fail."

AS - Amen a million times. How dumb are these fascists to take on the Brits and the Americans? Sure, we fight with each other; but up against this kind of evil, our divisions are petty. I also admire Livingstone's ability to see how liberal and left-wing Londoners who have helped build an amazingly vibrant, diverse and tolerant city are particularly affronted by these medieval monsters. Maybe this will help build support for a war that is as unavoidable as it is unlosable. I don't mean we won't continue to differ over means and methods and tactics and strategy. We will. That's our strength. But right and left, we are in this together

[Bugs ****ing Bunny]

Re: Re: Explosion heard in London - political part

Originally posted by DAVOUT


Londonistan was the name given in Europe to London, in recognition of the British policy which made of London a sanctuary for extremists islamists. Under this policy the aim of which being to prevent terrorists attacks in GB, UK refused until the current year to transfer to the French Justice the guy who organized the attack of Métro St-Michel in 1995.

The martial attitude adopted by Blair against the terrorism is quite recent; until the 11 September 2003 he did not give a damn of the terrorism on the continent.

That's a truly unbelievable post. Rachid Ramda was kept locked up in Belmarsh maximum security prison without trial for ten years, so to portray his case as an example of lax British attitudes on this issue is genuinely bizarre.

[Imran Siddiqui]

Originally posted by Drake Tungsten
There's legitmate questions about what Al Qaeda even is, exactly. It's often portrayed as some monolithic super-terrorist organization, but it may just be an umbrella organization that provides expertise, ideological guidance and support for a loose network of local Islamist groups that actually carry out attacks. And even that may be going too far...

Good comment, and sad to see no one has picked up on it. As mentioned, even if OBL is captured, it may not have an effect. It seems that AQ is a very decentralized group, kind of like the Basques in Spain. It seems they may all be clinging to the AQ name, but they don't have any contact with the guys we think are in charge. Perhaps they've gone to terrorist training camps (maybe not though), but it seems they are just on their own.

That makes it, of course, far harder to stamp out.

[Bugs ****ing Bunny]

Originally posted by C0ckney


ken livingstone has always been cosy with terrorists, from the IRA in 80s, to the guy who endorsed suicide bombings in israel last year. yeah he made a good speech, but as they say, actions speak louder than words.

Ken Livingstone's involvement with "Troops Out!" in the 80's really wasn't much different from the current political norm on this topic. Viewed with hindsight, he starts looking ahead of his time on that particular topic.

[DAVOUT]

Re: Re: Re: Explosion heard in London - political part

Originally posted by Lazarus and the Gimp


That's a truly unbelievable post. Rachid Ramda was kept locked up in Belmarsh maximum security prison without trial for ten years, so to portray his case as an example of lax British attitudes on this issue is genuinely bizarre.

This is a strange reason to refuse extradition. If you had no reason to judge him, he should not have been kept in jail without trial. If you kept him in jail because he had participated in a terror attack in France, but should not be judge, this is really bizarre.

[C0ckney]

Originally posted by Lazarus and the Gimp


Ken Livingstone's involvement with "Troops Out!" in the 80's really wasn't much different from the current political norm on this topic. Viewed with hindsight, he starts looking ahead of his time on that particular topic.

not really, considering all that had to done before the troops could be pulled out.

[Bugs ****ing Bunny]

Re: Re: Re: Re: Explosion heard in London - political part

Originally posted by DAVOUT


This is a strange reason to refuse extradition. If you had no reason to judge him, he should not have been kept in jail without trial. If you kept him in jail because he had participated in a terror attack in France, but should not be judge, this is really bizarre.

Were it not for the propensity of other suspects to be killed "while resisting arrest" in France, he'd have been extradicted quickly.

[lord of the mark]

Originally posted by Imran Siddiqui


Good comment, and sad to see no one has picked up on it. As mentioned, even if OBL is captured, it may not have an effect. It seems that AQ is a very decentralized group, kind of like the Basques in Spain. It seems they may all be clinging to the AQ name, but they don't have any contact with the guys we think are in charge. Perhaps they've gone to terrorist training camps (maybe not though), but it seems they are just on their own.

That makes it, of course, far harder to stamp out.

It also makes it harder for it to be effective with any kind of strategy. There are reasons organizations adopt centralization. AQ even at its most centralized, when it executed 9/11, which was planned and funded in cooperation with Headquarters, still had loose affiliates like JI in Indonesia. There are a number of AQ HQ's now. Theres still OBL/Zawahiri, and it at least appears that ops in Afghanistan and Pakistan are in touch with them. Theres a group of high level AQ under nominal house arrest in Iran, whose role is unclear. and theres Zarqawi in Iraq, who seems to be in charge of ops in Iraq, Jordan, and KSA, and who in the past ran his own parallel network in Europe. The Madrid bombings seem to have been run out of North Africa.

At this point its too early to say whether the London bombings were by a completely independent group, sharing little more than ideology and broad goals with AQ, or were more directly connected to some larger network.

[Lawrence of Arabia]

the ETA has been crushed tho - they arrested the top three leaders a few years ago.

[Velociryx]

Hey! Thank ya, JohnT and Alva! 's good to be back in these parts, if only for a little while...

Aggie As I said. What are you going to do? Invade another Muslim country and be humiliated by a bunch of amateurs again? You guys can't even keep Iraq straight and you're talking about committing more resources.

Wake up. You don't have enough soldiers.

It sounds to me like you're under the impression that we're somehow "losing" in Iraq. While I don't agree with how we got there, and while I admit that the present administration is filled with bumbling idiots who have got us into a situation with no clear exit strategy, that's not quite the same thing as what you're implying.

And, while it is an interesting thought, it does make me wonder what you base your opinion on? Is that based on comparative casuality analysis? If so...I think we come out rather ahead of the game.

Or perhaps it is based on the number of terrorist attacks in the US since we began. If so...I'd say we're rather ahead of the game. Nor can you point, with any reliability, to this latest incident in London as being directly caused by the US's presence in Iraq. In all liklihood, it has much more to do with the trial of one of their own taking place in that city.

Maybe then, it is based on our inability to overthrow the current not-very-nice man, and see to it that a more democratically chosen government was installed. Hmm...nope...we succeeded there too, or are starting to.

So...that said, I'd be curious to know what, sitting in your cozy armchair in a highly capitalized, industrialized nation, looking out the window of your Ivory Tower, your personal victory conditions might be.
(and none of that changes the fact that you're just whining about losing a few good Comrades. )

Kid And the leaders of the Islamic fundamentalists thank you for helping them recruit.

Yep...for as long as they live. The goal is to clearly illustrate that there's nothing but death to be gained by trying...or perhaps you'd rather us bend over and take one up the arse for the team every time they decide to blow something up. And they will. Even if every westerner left tomorrow, they would.

Axi : Aren't you the one who writes a fantasy novel, Vel?
Good point, and yes! Unlike some other authors of fiction (*cough* Marx), I do not, however, expect or intend that others will follow my fanciful stories with a fanaticism that can only be compared to religious zeal...

Back to Aggie You are at least 100 times more likely to die in a car crash than a terrorist attack. Even if there were ten of these attacks a year, it would still pale in comparison to auto deaths.

People need to grow up and get real.


While what you say is no doubt true, good sir, that does not somehow make it right, nor mean that it should be blissfully ignored. They want to use violence against us (and they do...they have, and continue to do so), that's cool. And we ought not lose a wink of sleep about returning that favor tenfold.

-=Vel=-

[Kuciwalker]

Originally posted by Imran Siddiqui
Good comment, and sad to see no one has picked up on it. As mentioned, even if OBL is captured, it may not have an effect. It seems that AQ is a very decentralized group, kind of like the Basques in Spain. It seems they may all be clinging to the AQ name, but they don't have any contact with the guys we think are in charge. Perhaps they've gone to terrorist training camps (maybe not though), but it seems they are just on their own.

That makes it, of course, far harder to stamp out.

WaPo described it as a franchise like McDonalds. McQaeda