Chickens roosting
The following is from an article detailing the investigation into the London bombings of last Thursday, With No Leads, British Consult Allies on Blasts.
A number of European countries, including France, Belgium, Britain and Germany, are now dealing with a new wave of participants in the insurgency in Iraq, in addition to the older wave of veterans who fought in Afghanistan. Some of these young recruits return to their home countries as heroes and recruit young men to participate in attacks at home.
The suggestion in the above paragraph is that maybe the London bombers, or their backers, were trained in Iraq. President Bush has said time and again that we are fighting terrorism in Iraq so we do not have to fight it here at home. How long now before this argument is proven facile and terribly incorrect?
10 Comments »
RSS feed for comments on this post. TrackBack URI
Leave a comment
Line and paragraph breaks automatic, e-mail address never displayed, HTML allowed: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>
Good point. I think this was the issue you and I first connected on, right?
Comment by Scrivener — Monday, 11 July 2005 @ 11:33 am
Yes, you pointed out the illogic of claiming that somehow fighting terrorists in Iraq precludes them attacking us at home. I doubt anyone will see the illogic in it, though, no matter how many times it is pointed out. An LA Times article suggests Bush’s support will increase despite the demonstration by terrorists in London that the Iraq War has NOT made us any safer.
Comment by Matthew — Monday, 11 July 2005 @ 11:38 am
I have to concur. No matter how many times I have commented that all the Homeland Security initiatives have made us not one whit safer, and that going to war in Iraq has made a many, many more people hate us, many of the people around me think the war in Iraq will end terrorism.
Someone much more articulate than I did a wonderful article on why you can’t win a war against a wide-spread grassroots movement. Wish I could find it now! But that is what fanatical Islamicism is at this point. And this administration’s actions have spurred its growth.
Comment by Lisle — Tuesday, 12 July 2005 @ 11:34 am
Here’s a dumb-ass comment. Look at what Bush said recently about the bombings in London:
“When they are constantly on the run they can’t plan attacks, so we and our allies will stay on the offensive.” Source: BBC
Let’s see.. the ‘terrorists’ have been ‘on the run’ since ‘the war on terror’ began… but they carried out synchronous bombings in London. Yeah, Bushie, that makes sense.
Comment by wadulisi — Tuesday, 12 July 2005 @ 11:36 am
There is nothing logical about anything Bush says or does in regards to terrorism. I recall after 9/11, Bin Laden made it pretty clear (as if the attacks themselves did not) that he wanted war with the west. So Bush gave Bin Laden the war he wanted. Does that make any sense to you? Not to mention it conflicts with our stated (albeit unkept) promise never to give terrorists what they want.
Comment by Matthew — Tuesday, 12 July 2005 @ 11:38 am
So, do you know of Ward Churchill’s book On the Justice?
Comment by wadulisi — Tuesday, 12 July 2005 @ 11:44 am
No, I’m not much interested in Ward Churchill. He seems like a glory hound to me, and I have no interest in helping him promote himself. I also don’t particularly like what he said about the 9/11 victims (yes, I’ve read his comments in context, and they are still despicable and moronic). I have no intention of giving the man any more of my attention than I have to.
Comment by Matthew — Tuesday, 12 July 2005 @ 11:52 am
I had asked, because the full title of that book is On the Justice of Roosting Chickens: Reflections on the Consequences of U.S. Imperial Arrogance and Criminality. It came to mind when I read your post title. So, did you know of Churchill before the media circus this year?
Comment by wadulisi — Thursday, 14 July 2005 @ 2:21 am
No, I had never heard of him. And that generated part of my dislike of him. His essay (which was taken from the book you cite) was too extreme, as extreme as any of the garbage put out by the Right–it was demanding a reaction from zealots. And he got what he wanted and deserved: attacks and smears.
Comment by Matthew — Thursday, 14 July 2005 @ 6:47 am
Sometimes I feel as if the war on terror is a ploy by the Republicans to keep the citizens of this country under their thumbs and in line (i.e.: through fear and propoganda).
I have had a couple of students who have served in Iraq. When quiried about their experiences, each one has made it clear that we (the United States) have no business being there and that are involvement in the Middle East is doing nothing on “the war on terror.” It is a sad state of affairs.
Melissa, I found the BBC quote you shared typical of Bush. Has anyone read “New Doublespeak: Why No One Knows What Anyone’s Saying Anymore” by William Lutz? It was published in either 1997 or 1998; but comments on how no one in our country ever speaks honestly and clearly, or even to the point. It is an interesting read.
Comment by Brandi — Friday, 15 July 2005 @ 11:58 pm