Do you see any connection between the bombings and Iraq?

Discussion in 'Current Affairs, News and Analysis' started by KGB_resident, Jul 16, 2005.

Welcome to the Army Rumour Service, ARRSE

The UK's largest and busiest UNofficial military website.

The heart of the site is the forum area, including:


    'Maybe the terrorists even voted for Labour party?'

    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?

  3. .

    Steady on Veg, you might not like George W Bush, but he does not live in a cave.. :D
  4. It's OK, it's time for my medicine now.
  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. 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. 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.
  10. Makes for interesting reading.


    Hat is on just in case :D
  11. I'm genuinely sorry.

  12. 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.
  13. Hooray for Iran, what an awesome ally 8O
  14. No worse than Stalin.