quote:LONDON, July 18 -- Britain's position as a subordinate ally of the United States has been a "high-risk policy" that has left it vulnerable to terrorist attacks such as the recent bombings of London's transportation system, according to a briefing paper released early Monday by one of the country's most prominent foreign affairs research groups.
quote:The government immediately responded with an angry statement from Defense Secretary John Reid that challenged and dismissed the report's conclusions.
"When this report says that we have made ourselves more of a target because of our involvement in Afghanistan and Iraq and our efforts to tackle al Qaeda, what alternative is it proposing?" Reid asked. "That we should stand back while others take on the terrorists?"
Of course, what the report is really saying is that the government should have realized the situation was more volatile and done more on the homefront to identify plots and foil them, etc.
This is a rather incredible counter-attack by the government since it opens up the dialog for these folks to come back with alternatives that the government didn't think of, and thus didn't pursue. In the wake of the subway bombings, with plenty of blame to go around, I think Blair is just not thinking things through before speaking out against critics.
What he should have said is:
"We knew going into this that there were enhanced risks, but the point is that it is better to take the fight to them rather than always wait at home for the next attack."
Then, they could relate it to the fact that while the subway bombings were terrible, they were also a long time in coming and the pool of available suicide bombers is not likely to be all that high in the UK. There may be more of them out there, but it's not like we should figure that every person with semitic features wandering London is a potential killer. Not by long shot.
Ah well. The article goes on to talk about the pressures he's under and I'm actually glad that the UK was with us in Afghanistan and Iraq. Their military has more experience in these areas (both geographically and in terms of the type of mission) and they appear to be a good example in terms of interaction with the citizens of the countries we've occupied.
Posts: 22497 | Registered: Sep 2000
| IP: Logged |
posted
Well, they've had their own problems, too, I believe.
I'm kind of saddened by the fact that Britian might do even more to infringe on the civil liberties of its citizens as, from what I understand, they are already one of the most surveiled peoples on the planet. Things like this are just going to make people even more eager to have the state monitor the innocent populace, despite the fact that there was pretty much nothing the state could have done to catch these guys.
Frankly, I am less interested in how the government dropped the ball and more interested in how the Muslim community dropped the ball on this one. Did most, if not all of these guys, go to Pakistan to recieve training in terrorism? If they did, and they are native Brits, how did they get to the point where they wanted to go to Pakistan in the first place to become terrorists? I highly doubt that they changed their minds in the few short months they were there. This tells me that there is a group in Britain filling the heads of young Muslims with crap and I think these people are the ones that really need to be held accountable.
Posts: 13123 | Registered: Feb 2002
| IP: Logged |
posted
Storm, there absolutely ARE groups recruiting actively in Britain. Until very recently they were speaking openly about their call for jihad against the US and Britain (among others). It's only recently that they've been driven underground.
I kind of wonder what the "community" could do. We've learned here that even silly-sounding threats need to be taken seriously (post-Columbine). The people in their community may have just not fully understood that this was more than just idle kids being hot heads.
Posts: 22497 | Registered: Sep 2000
| IP: Logged |
posted
Well, the excuse that's given for groups not speaking out in Muslim countries is that they can't do it for fear of being killed or something, but that wouldn't seem to be a factor here, so I guess I would like to see more publicity from the 'good' Muslims deriding the 'bad' Muslims. Get some clerical heavy to come out and have a debate with one of their guys. That kind of thing. Make it clear in the minds of everyone in the world exactly where most Muslims stand on this.
Now, I understand that the media is biased against Muslims and probably doesn't give as much air time as might be wanted to those Muslims against Islamicists. So, it may be that I am in error here and there has already been a significant media campaign undertaken by peace loving Muslims.
As far as I am aware, though, all I've heard is Muslims denouncing terrorism, not extreme Islam or the leaders of the movement or publicly embracing Christians, Jews, and the west.
Posts: 13123 | Registered: Feb 2002
| IP: Logged |
quote: As far as I am aware, though, all I've heard is Muslims denouncing terrorism, not extreme Islam or the leaders of the movement or publicly embracing Christians, Jews, and the west.
Is this because of media prejudice, or is it because it's not said very often?
Posts: 17164 | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
I know of some incidents, but I think what I would like to see is a major media campaign with commercials.
Posts: 13123 | Registered: Feb 2002
| IP: Logged |
Printer-friendly view of this topic
