Not Just About Iraq (Was: London)

[Ghetta Life]

Most of Rich's statement below is idiocy.  It assumes a knowledge of the 
motives of those who did this terrible deed.  Presumptuous, to say the 
least.  That Bush's war in Iraq was a foolish move is unquestionably true, 
IMHO.  But to lay today's attack at his feet is idocy:

The following is from TPM Cafe:

http://www.tpmcafe.com/story/2005/7/7/133153/3136

By Ed Kilgore

In the wake of the horrific attacks on London today, there's little doubt a 
dangerous and predictable idea is kicking around the world, mostly unspoken: 
Britain was targeted for these attacks strictly because of its involvement 
in Iraq.  The corollary, of course, is that countries that don't want to be 
next in line for attacks--say, the rest of Europe--can make themselves safe 
by distancing themselves from Anglo-American policy in Iraq and elsewhere.

This line of reasoning, such as it is, ignores the timing of the attacks, 
aimed at Britain not so much as part of the Coalition in Iraq, but as host 
country for a G-8 summit heavily advertised as offering a collective 
response by the world's leading democracies to global challenges like 
poverty and climate change.  The apparent purpose was to hold all these 
nations accountable for the manifold grievances of Islamists towards the 
rest of the world, grievances that go back not just to 2003 or 2001, but to 
the distant past, while underlying their own "solution" for the challenges 
facing humankind: Jihad.

More immediately, the temptation to believe that the attacks are "all about 
Iraq" ignores every indication that al Qaeda and its allies agree, 
ironically, with George W. Bush's simplistic conviction that 9/11, 
Afghanistan, Iraq, Madrid, Bali, and now London are all a seamless web of 
conflicts in which there can be no neutral parties.

Here's what George Galloway, MP, Saddam's old buddy, said in the immediate 
wake of the attacks: "We argued, as did the security services in this 
country, that the attacks on Afghanistan and Iraq would increase the threat 
of terrorist attack in Britain. Tragically Londoners have now paid the price 
of the Government ignoring such warnings."

Aside from the remarkable fact that "Gorgeous George" didn't have the 
decency to express solidarity with his own countrymen and wait a week or two 
to blame the attacks on Blair while counseling surrender to the aims of the 
terrorists, Galloway did do us all the service of nicely presenting the 
Islamist talking points: it's not just about Iraq, but about Afghanistan as 
well, and indeed, about any interference with Jihadist terrorism.

Lest anyone think Galloway speaks for the anti-Iraq War British Left, here's 
the rather different response offered by "Red Ken" Livingstone, the Mayor of 
London:

"London has been the target of a cowardly terrorist attack. Londoners have 
responded calmly and courageously....

"Innocent people going from all of London's communities have been targeted 
by this indiscriminate attack. I urge Londoners from all of this city's 
diverse communities and faiths to support one another and stand together 
against terrorism."

We can all argue later about the best way to "stand together" against 
terrorism, and that will definitely involve differences of opinion about 
Iraq, but make no mistake: we do have to stand together, without 
qualification.


>From: rich <richard.romeo at gmail.com>
>
>Hope all our friends on the list from London are OK after today's 
>unfortunate events in the ever expanding global war on terror--a war which 
>the US has no clue how to win much less protect its own and friends

_________________________________________________________________
Express yourself instantly with MSN Messenger! Download today it's FREE! 
http://messenger.msn.click-url.com/go/onm00200471ave/direct/01/