• ARRSE have partnered with Armadillo Merino to bring you an ARRSE exclusive, generous discount offer on their full price range.
    To keep you warm with the best of Merino gear, visit www.armadillomerino.co.uk and use the code: NEWARRSE40 at the checkout to get 40% off!
    This superb deal has been generously offered to us by Armadillo Merino and is valid until midnight on the the 28th of February.

Do you see any connection between the bombings and Iraq?

#1
http://www.express.co.uk/story.html?story=5&r=112153147915004290

Tony Blair has insisted the London bombings were not motivated by revenge for the invasion of Iraq.
...
the Prime Minister said the fanatics who killed 55 people in the bombings were driven by "evil ideology" rather than opposition to any policy
'Maybe the terrorists even voted for Labour party?'

Their extremist propaganda played on "the tendency to guilt of the developed world", and Mr Blair told party activists it would be a "misunderstanding of a catastrophic order" to think that if we changed our behaviour they would change theirs.

He said: "Their cause is not founded on an injustice. It is founded on a belief, one whose fanaticism is such that it can't be moderated.
What do you think about it?
 
#2
The golden rule about being an evil, twisted, nihilistic, fascist organisation is that:

(A) Your demands should be completely unrealistic

(B) They should be changed every now and then

(C) If anybody does meet them, change them immediately

(D) They should act as a flag of convenience for your real demands

Bin Laden's original declaration of war on the US was all about US troops in the holy lands of Islam post-GW1. The Americans began to withdraw troops. So the demands morphed.

The spams where nowhere near Iraq on September 11th 2001. Had we not supported the spams then the Islamists would still have viewed as as Imperialist lap-dogs and attacked us maybe in exactly the same way as they did, or perhaps later. In any case, who wants their foreign policy dictated to by some murdering, medieval toerag who lives in a cave? I don't.

I'm not the greatest fan of the Iraq war, mainly because of the incompetent way the politicians handled the post-conflict phase. Saying that, I'd rather support Blair than Bin Laden, any day of the week.

So, for me, this is a time to rally around your enemies' enemy: they are your friend. Blaming Iraq on the Islamist's real objectives is bed-wetting, intellectually lazy, leftist, fellow-travelling bullsh1t. I'm a Churchill man, not an Attlee devotee.

Does that answer your question?

V!
 
#5
Not really anything to do with Iraq. Muslims may promote that idea it after the event to try and mitigate the blame being put on them, but really they would have done it anyway. Surprised it's taken them four years after 9/11 really, but then there has probably been a few failed attempts in the intervening years we've not heard of.

The Iraq excuse is just another "Oh, Oh, Oh, what has been done to us poor Muslims by the evil west!" In reality, they have lost the battle of evolution, will never catch up, and are having difficulties coming to terms with it. They tend to blame their failures on others and conclude that what's gone wrong is that they're not Islamic enough (despite that being the fundamental problem). Were they to admit that maybe Islam isn't the way ahead after all, the end result would be that they would have to change to such a degree that they would stop being Muslims eventually. Their best chance of catching up is to try and bring down other civilisations, not just the West; South, and South-East, Asia are having problems too.

Of course, that's just my opinion - I'll be trolling the NAAFI if you need me.

.
 
#6
Yes and no.

Yes - in that there are a lot more jihadi around now that the US has boosted their recruitment (Guantanamo Bay, Falluja etc) and given them a nice live fire range to practise in.

No - in that we'd be on the list anyway for merely existing. If Iraq had not been invaded we'd still get attacked.
 
#7
The Joint Intelligence Committee reported that an invasion of Iraq would increase the threat of terrorism from Islamic militants.

It is not possible to state that such attacks would not have taken place if the Iraq invasion had not occured but it is the case that there would have been a lesser likelihood of them occurring.

It is correct to state that the threat of terrorism should not determine foreign policy objectives. However, mishandled and expensive military action with little diplomatic or domestic support and of little benefit to our national interest that increases the threat to UK citizens at home and abroad should be viewed with an extremely critical eye.

This cr@p about standing "shoulder to shoulder in the face of terrorism" is being manipulated by a cynical government that has no qualms about stooping to any level to maintain control. Bliar should have been given the heave-ho months ago and his quasi-Churchillian pose is a cynical sham. Was he so resolute with certain parties in Northern Ireland?
 
#8
Vegetius said:
Does that answer your question?
Dear Vegetius!

I understand your answer as you don't see any connection. As least the connections are not the main cause of the bombings.

Of course I rather support mr.Bush and mr.Blair than Osamma bin Laden. Of course I wish to see all these terrorists in the Hell.

But the problem is too deep to be resolved by front-line attack.
 
#9
MrPVRd said:
The Joint Intelligence Committee reported that an invasion of Iraq would increase the threat of terrorism from Islamic militants.

It is not possible to state that such attacks would not have taken place if the Iraq invasion had not occured but it is the case that there would have been a lesser likelihood of them occurring.

It is correct to state that the threat of terrorism should not determine foreign policy objectives. However, mishandled and expensive military action with little diplomatic or domestic support and of little benefit to our national interest that increases the threat to UK citizens at home and abroad should be viewed with an extremely critical eye.

This cr@p about standing "shoulder to shoulder in the face of terrorism" is being manipulated by a cynical government that has no qualms about stooping to any level to maintain control. Bliar should have been given the heave-ho months ago and his quasi-Churchillian pose is a cynical sham. Was he so resolute with certain parties in Northern Ireland?
Spot on mate.

I was in france at the time and had real problems getting any details on the bombings as the radio stations were all french (quelle surprise) and the papers were at least a day behind. Anyway, as soon as i heard about them i started getting suspicious about how the government will 'use' this attrocity (and dont get me wrong it was horrific, and no i dont think the govt had anything to do with it), to bring in more draconian laws and control mechanisms in the name of anti-terrorism. I just know that should anyone raise any concerns they will be heckled down (labour stylee) as being pro-terrorist.

We dont want to hand the terrorists a victory by bowing down to all that his emminence king tony lays down in front of us.
 
#13
Lots of stuff in the papers at the moment with comment from muslim youth about the suicide bombers. Most run along the lines of " it was terrible but look what happened in Afghanistan and Iraq". Therefore there must be a connection!!

In case I missed something the Taliban regime was not something to support in any way shape of form and the Northern Alliance did the majority of the fighting on the ground, it was not invaded by the US (although the Taliban were heavily bombed). Saddam Hussien was not a nice bloke and the vast majority of deaths post war have been Muslims killing muslims. The numbers of Muslim Iraqis killed by AQ and the insurgency make those (aledgedly) killed in Falluja pale into insignificance.

Funny that you don't see these facts been used by anyone in the press to counter the "but look what happened in Iraq/Afghanistan" arguement. We need to be firm with our response to the "we are the victims" b*llocks being spouted by Muslim communities in the UK.
 
#16
Did our invasion and handling of Iraq cause, at least in part, those blokes to travel down to London and initiate those devices? Yes

Was the will and the capability to conduct terrorism in this and other western(-ised) countries in place before we went into Iraq and Afghanistan? Yes

Will that will and capability disappear if we withdrew all troops out of arab countries tomorrow? No

Will it dissapate? Yes, but when you only need a dozen blokes, some readily available explosives/readily available Boeings and a bit of training to mount a serious act of terrorism, we had better start realising that the threat needs to be eradicated, not dissapated. We've become a bit desensitised to Sept 11 because it get hauled out every time we are asked to choose sides over the next debacle-against-terror, but I think we do need to remember that the attack wasn't a Spectacular, it was a serious attempt to bring down a nation. Whether that would have happened is another debate, but the will was undoubtably there.

The real question is when we are going to get some decent leadership in the war against terror, when we are going to get issued a mission statement instead of a tagline and a concept of ops that doesn't read like it's been written by Jerry Bruckheimer.

The yanks may ignore us when we talk about hearts and minds (what do we know, right?), but as a nation who is committed to fighting AQ/whoever we need to start sparking. The first hearts and minds to win over are our own. We won't win this fight on Sky News; there won't be lots of satisfying lines of enemy dead that will allow Mr I.M. Stupid of Fleet, Hants to keep score. We'll start winning it down the pub, or chatting in bed with the missus, or in the cofee room at work. Every time someone utters "we should just round them all (ie Arabs, Sikhs, Pakistanis, Indians, fricking martians) up and send them home" we lose a little bit more of that vital ground. Everytime we nod while reading the Express and feel our hearts warm slightly with perceived security because the government is rushing in legislation to close a stable door we can't even identify yet, we are losing ground. Every time we look at the 'darkie' across from us on the tube and blatantly stare the poor git up and down in order to make us feel like we are empowered, we lose ground.
Fundamentalism is a misnomer, it's got as much to do with the foundations of a religion/culture as Yoko Ono had to do with the foundations of the Beatles. Extremism is a distorted, tumourous off-shoot that occurs when a culture undergoes enforced modernisation in a hostile environment. By a hostile environment, I mean White Kids in Leeds's schools beating up Muslim Kids; I mean a train carriage full of scared people glaring at a muslim woman because she's wearing different clothes to them. Extremism thrives in such an environement, and unless we start integrating we are fcuked - unless you prefer the other solution which the Germans took up in the 30's and 40's. Remember they were just another scared nation reacting to an internal threat, we call them Nazis so we don't offend modern Germans, but it's important to remember that a nation, not unlike ourselves in culture, thought the Final Solution was a bally good idea (if only tacitly).

The Muslim community, especially those professional ostriches of the British Muslim Council need to step up and play the game as well. At some point they have to realise in what country and centuary we are living. To be fair, our own government and cultural leaders need to help them out by defining what our country is about. An outsider arriving at the moment will see little more than Big Brother, kids raping other kids, churches worrying whether the inclusion of gay clergy is against Corinthians 1, Verse 2 to irrelevant, and tv shows about fat chavs who can't bring up kids. I don't know about you, but that's not what I think about when I stand up for the National Anthem.

Like I say, it doesn't start with AH or friggin 'Ranger' Bns - although we had better be prepared that they are, will and MUST be used when needed, without hesitation or - when the time comes - restraint.
It starts, boringly (and rather frustratingly when I read about 55 dead people that some scrotes thought themselves more important than) with debate and discussion.

I want to be able to sit in front of a bunch of muslim blokes my age and say: "Well feck my boots, you're all a bunch of crazy feckers aren't you" without being told by a bunch of spineless suits that I'm inciting something or other. The heated debate that would follow such an opener might be the kind of route we need to go down to understand each other. I dunno, I'm just a bloke who talks about his pen1s a lot.

Final point then I'll get off my soapbox. Imagine Britain is a section that you've been thrown in with - a cobbled together section placed on the expected axis of an enemy armoured advance. You don't know each other, they're from all over the world and you don't know where their loyalties lie. As a sect commander do you spend what time you have before Johnny OPFOR comes to tea moaning and chimfing about how you ended up with such a motley crew and how it never would have been like that in the good old days, or do you accept that this is the team you've got to do the job with, break down the barriers within them, get to know them as quickly as possible, get them working together, trust them with their arcs and face your front?
 
#17
RTFQ. Elliquent post with some good points as always.

Couple of disagreements though. It will do no good us taking a more inclusive/multi culti approach when those that would do this type of thing are being told over and over again by their religious/cultural leaders that we are a depraved bunch of evil b'stards who will burn in hell fire just because we like a drink, eat bacon sandwiches and don't mind seeing a womens ankles.

The major problem with the Muslim faith IMO is that it is actually exactly the same as the Jeudo/Christian religion at the same time in its development ie 1500s complete with religious persecution, crusades, martyrs and the inquisition.

What might help the situation is if the Imans that are allowed to practice in this country are licensed/taught by those Muslims who are actually living here and not as is the case in a lot (majority?) of cases that they are the fundamentlist cast offs who have been kicked out of their own country for being to OTT for their own church and congregation.
 
#18
Steven, I agree entirely - extremism in any culture can only ultimately be defeated by the culture itself. In the mean time we need to protect ourselves, and I think that starts with creating closer ties with the Islamic community - again, we either do that or start building big walls. At the very least it will allow us to understand some of the inhibitions of that community that make them seem so alien to us. For example: some Muslims seem to think that it's not beholden of them to judge other muslims - that's Allah's remit, some think they are required to put Islam above Nation, some even go as far as to just use the good old Insh'Allah maxim to absolve them from action. The UK historically has had a somewhat sobering effect on the religions that have migrated to it. We sort of add a British sense of understatement and mistrust of exaggeration to the more extreme elements.

And don't get me wrong, the only good terrorist is a dead one, I stand by that - especially when they start hitting the country where my parents, sister and girlfriend live. The more extreme leaders that preach their crazy doctine should be removed, but the best way to shut a loud-mouth up is for his audience to stop listening. It's a dangerous analogy I know, but PIRA changed their tune somewhat when its support base began saying "yeah, whatever."

If the government starts enforcing itself on the muslim community without integration, there will be a lot more bored, angry young men who feel alienated from wider society and mainstream islam who will be joining the ranks of the crazy feckers. If they wore a uniform and picked up an AK, I'd have no dramas with that - here's the line in the sand - but they don't.

This country can withstand an external threat indefinitely, history has proven that, but when that threat walks alongside them, when they don't have Nelson, The Few, Tommy Aitkins etc fighting for them and providing that thin red line - real fear will set in. The threat goes to work with them, it lives down the road from them. A few more massacres and fear, generated by the titilation-serving traitors that run our media, will make us surrender the freedoms the old guys fought WW2 for, and even if we kill every last terrorist - they still would have won.

It may get to that, I just think we should try the old Hearts and Minds thing one more time first - it's done us good in the past.
 
#19
All very good points RTFQ, but...

Is it our place (as British mainstream society) to integrate ourselves with the muslim community, or should it be the muslim communities responsibility to integrate itself (which i dont see them doing) with mainstream society?

As far as i can see, the muslim community (i know its a sweeping generalisation) as a whole don't seem to be intigrating themselves. I realise that there are large numbers of muslims (and sikhs/jews/buddhists) that HAVE integrated themselves and are an example unto others for their hard work and dedication, but that doesn't detract from the general trend.
 
#20
A_S, I understand where you're coming from and agree - people who want to come into this country should endeavour to be British, and all that entails. All I've heard so far (not on here, but amongst friends, colleagues family etc) is a rather reactionary collective stamping of the feet and shouts of it's not right, we shouldn't have people like this here, how did it happen? I AGREE with those sentiments, in an ideal world we wouldn't be in this situation, but I also think that there's no solution offered by these sentiments.

It's a sad fact that if we remain laissez faire and wait for the muslim community to unilaterally integrate, it won't happen*. We can sulk about that, or we can do something about it - I can garantee that while we're sulking about the state of this nation, the BNP, and even scarier the hardline and ignorant POLITICIANS in the main parties will be drawing up some great plans that appeal to the News International-fed masses. Do you trust them to come up with something sensible and something that will benefit this country? I don't.

Please don't get me wrong - I'm not apologising for any of these feckers. I'm simply offering a different slant. "If they don't like it they can feck off back home" won't work as a solution, and we need to start understanding the roots of extremist terrorism before we start making vote-winning strategies that will leave more dead bodies in our cities.

the basic tenets of counter terrorism require us to know our enemy and be able to distinguish - and alienate - him from the population from which he originates



*As discussed elsewhere on here, there are more barriers than simply religion - economic, educational and linguistic factors are also strongly at work to make these people feel they'll be safer in their own ghettos.
 

Latest Threads