PDA

View Full Version : Friend asks: "Why was London attacked?"




Starks
01-10-2008, 02:11 PM
I told him it was because of the deep bond between us and the British as members of the Coalition of the Willing.

Is that a correct assessment?

tsetsefly
01-10-2008, 02:12 PM
iraq, yes, why was spain bombed?

Todd
01-10-2008, 02:13 PM
Didn't the last vestige of Spanish troops leave the middle east after the Madrid bombing?

proximity
01-10-2008, 02:13 PM
Tell him to research the British Empire. (in history books not written by the Brits)
The Brits didn't need our help to be hated around the world.

proximity
01-10-2008, 02:15 PM
Didn't the last vestige of Spanish troops leave the middle east after the Madrid bombing?

Yes Spain was part of the coalition of meddling in the middle east till then. Lets not forget the Spanish Empire also.

Zydeco
01-10-2008, 02:16 PM
The dreamworld answer is "Because the British supported the Iraq War."

The real answer, only to be given to non-sheople, is this:

http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=8756795263359807776

m72mc
01-10-2008, 02:17 PM
they dont attack my country and we are free and prosperous

sweden

nor do they attack

island
finland
denmark
norway
the list goes on...


all free and wealthy nations who dont meddle in the middle east.

dirka
01-10-2008, 02:18 PM
They were attacked because they are in Iraq just like we are!!!


And if Rudy thinks the hostages taken in Munich during the Olympics was because the Arabs hate the germans, I want to find out where he is getting those drugs. You know, just for reference.

Mattsa
01-10-2008, 02:19 PM
I told him it was because of the deep bond between us and the British as members of the Coalition of the Willing.

Is that a correct assessment?

Bliar and Brown's NuLabour government is a satellite of the NeoConservative doctrine of global empire building.

Hardly surprising than that muslims living in the UK are royally pissed off. I kinda understand their motivation for bombing the metro in London, though of course I don't condone it.

CountryRoads
01-10-2008, 02:20 PM
Spain and Britain were in the coalition of the willing.


British were messing around there long before though. Watch Lawrence of Arabia.

stefans
01-10-2008, 02:20 PM
iraq, yes, why was spain bombed?

rhetoric question?
spain had over a thousand troops in iraq and was bombed right before the spanish elections - the new government pulled out of iraq.

it's a classic case of suicide terrorism to influence public opinion in a democracy because of occupation, as described by robert pape in "dying to win" - one of the books on rudy's reading list.

Mattsa
01-10-2008, 02:20 PM
they dont attack my country and we are free and prosperous

sweden

nor do they attack

island
finland
denmark
norway
the list goes on...


all free and wealthy nations who dont meddle in the middle east.

EXACTLY

I didn't notice any terrorist organisations attacking Switzerland either

Or China........

Starks
01-10-2008, 02:25 PM
Just to play devil's advocate...

Would the reason that countries like Sweden or Switzerland aren't attacked is because they lack a substantial Muslim population and because said countries haven't pissed of radical Islamic groups?

noxagol
01-10-2008, 02:30 PM
Just to play devil's advocate...

Would the reason that countries like Sweden or Switzerland aren't attacked is because they lack a substantial Muslim population and because said countries haven't pissed of radical Islamic groups?

Sweden as a huge muslim population.

stefans
01-10-2008, 02:30 PM
Just to play devil's advocate...

Would the reason that countries like Sweden or Switzerland aren't attacked is because they lack a substantial Muslim population and because said countries haven't pissed of radical Islamic groups?

switzerland does have a substantial muslim population. and integration problems.
don't know about sweden.

Todd
01-10-2008, 02:32 PM
they dont attack my country and we are free and prosperous

sweden

nor do they attack

island
finland
denmark
norway
the list goes on...


all free and wealthy nations who dont meddle in the middle east.

I am a little worried about this argument though because Holland is about as pacifist as it gets and there have been some nasty situations there recently.

m72mc
01-10-2008, 02:39 PM
you know what, no one here in europe is surpriced some muslims hate the usa, because of the way you go around the world killing ppl. as a matter of fact I cant believe you even have this debate. I hope you are aware about 1 million iraqis have been killed in irak and on top of that polluted with depleted uranium, causing sickness for the next 25 millions years. What you think , if you stop doing things like this, maybe you will be more liked ? ?????

do you only watch britney spears ?

noone I know is surpriced here, when you were attacked. (if you were)

it is nice you are waking up though...

shadowhooch
01-10-2008, 02:41 PM
I don't think we should deny that senseless terrorism does and will continue to occur even if we end the meddling and occupation of other countries. Radicals will NOT go away no matter what.

But will attacks lessen? Most likely because it will be harder for the radicals to recruit as we aren't fulfilling their stereotypes. It will be difficult to find many people motivated enough to take their own life unless they really feel there is a gross injustice against them or their country.

However, the debate should really be about the solution.
Our current solution is to have a base in every country, fund puppet governments, and constantly involve ourselves in every conflict. This solution costs the taxpayer billions and billions of dollars and is almost self-perpetuating the problem as more terrorists are created as we dispose of the one's we catch/kill. This approach is no longer affordable.

A more economical solution would be to strengthen our borders and home security and deal with the individual occurances of terrorism (which are pretty few and far between). We were right to go after Bin Laden and hunt him down along with the other Al Queda operatives. We were wrong to expand this into nation building and invading countries.
If a terrorist group or country ever became powerful enough for them to be true threat to our national security and the American people felt action needed to be taken, we would have Congress declare war and we would fight the battle, disable their capabilities, and then come home. We would be united in the effort because the authority came from the people and from Congress instead of bowing to a single President's whims.

We must take the more economical approach for the sake of our economy.

Mort
01-10-2008, 02:46 PM
switzerland does have a substantial muslim population. and integration problems.
don't know about sweden.


really? I was under the impressiion switzerland was almost impossible to get immigrated into. Is it just Muslims reproducing?

krott5333
01-10-2008, 02:50 PM
coughfalsecoughflagcoughoperationcough

m72mc
01-10-2008, 03:00 PM
switzerland does have a substantial muslim population. and integration problems.
don't know about sweden.

many muslims here

many iraqis coming here now. cause of the war

Constitution Supporter
01-10-2008, 03:01 PM
BECAUSE THEY'RE FREE! LISTING TO RUDY, HE KNOWS! [Just kidding!!!!! Obviously.] I don't think I know about this particular issues to say much, but I think that while unantagonized terror does exist no matter what, much more problems are caused and intensified by poor foreign policy.

JMann
01-10-2008, 03:03 PM
It is also fair to say London was attacked because their immigration policy has made it way to easy for those wanting to attack to live there. Muhammad is now the second most popular name for newborns in England.

Zydeco
01-10-2008, 03:10 PM
coughfalsecoughflagcoughoperationcough

Yes, and an obvious one, if you bother to watch the video I linked to earlier.

Oklahoma City, 9/11, 7/7 -- folks, they're going to keep doing it as long as we keep falling for it.

Dave Pedersen
01-10-2008, 03:11 PM
It is obvious once you know that terrorism response exercises were being conducted at exactly the same time and exactly the same locations in London the only conclusion is that the London attacks were false flags to terrorize the public and blame it on Islamofascism.

synthetic
01-10-2008, 03:14 PM
The dreamworld answer is "Because the British supported the Iraq War."

The real answer, only to be given to non-sheople, is this:

http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=8756795263359807776

I think most people find it safer to be racist and blame Muslims rather than believe their own government is capable of such things. Interesting video though.

stefans
01-10-2008, 03:17 PM
really? I was under the impressiion switzerland was almost impossible to get immigrated into. Is it just Muslims reproducing?

I'm no expert on switzerland but I think your impression is wrong. there are even people from EU countries immigrating into switzerland because they have lower unemployment and generally a better economic situation right now.
and I've heard about a swiss election campaign for stricter immigration laws. made it to the MSM because they were accused of racism.

ron paul's position on foreign policy is good and all, but I think he underestimates the problems of the current forms of islam among individuals when they immigrate into western countries.
leaving them alone in their own countries is fine, but the way a lot of them behave in western countries is just unacceptable.
virtually every european country with muslim populations from middle eastern countries has problems integrating them.

idrake
01-10-2008, 03:25 PM
you know what, no one here in europe is surpriced some muslims hate the usa, because of the way you go around the world killing ppl. as a matter of fact I cant believe you even have this debate. I hope you are aware about 1 million iraqis have been killed in irak and on top of that polluted with depleted uranium, causing sickness for the next 25 millions years. What you think , if you stop doing things like this, maybe you will be more liked ? ?????

do you only watch britney spears ?

noone I know is surpriced here, when you were attacked. (if you were)

it is nice you are waking up though...

Yes. Britney...she's on MSNBC more than anything else right now because Dr. Phil Blah Blah Blah. Don't forget we also have the teacher who f'd a student that has parole problems.

We don't have stations like the BBC that actually produce news. Honestly, I'm not completely sure about the BBC, but when I listen to it, I'm always surprised about their depth of reporting.

ButchHowdy
01-10-2008, 03:35 PM
Last summer, a well known blog put some pieces together about a security company called ICTS:

"ICTS? An Israeli international security company. In charge of security at all the airports involved in the 9-11 attacks (verified); in charge of several aspects of security in the London Underground on 777 (and the bus blew up RIGHT OUTSIDE their offices in "kcotsivaT" (spell that backwards to get the correct spelling) Square (verified); in charge of the Madrid Train Station on 3-11 (still need to verify this); and in charge of security at Glasgow airport (verified). . ."

http://www.godlikeproductions.com/forum1/message406972/pg1

Sey.Naci
01-10-2008, 03:44 PM
bin Laden himself said that any member nations of the "Coalition of the Willing" - aka the Coalition of the Coerced, for many - would be subject to al Quaida attacks.

MayTheRonBeWithYou
01-10-2008, 03:47 PM
Because they are militarily occupying Muslim lands. End of story.

The Koran specifically DEMANDS that all Muslims violently resist infidel occupying forces.

In fact, Muslims who do not violently resist infidel occupiers are betraying Islam.

pacelli
01-10-2008, 03:48 PM
I told him it was because of the deep bond between us and the British as members of the Coalition of the Willing.

Is that a correct assessment?

Paul said in his interview with Ingraham that any country involved in Iraq was attacked-- spain, UK, etc.

You also wonder why Peter Power, of Visor Consultants, was running anti-terror drills that morning which speculated that the exact stations would be hit. Here's the youtube with the interview from the day that London tube was hit:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JKvkhe3rqtc

stefans
01-10-2008, 03:49 PM
Because they are militarily occupying Muslim lands. End of story.

The Koran specifically DEMANDS that all Muslims violently resist infidel occupying forces.

In fact, Muslims who do not violently resist infidel occupiers are betraying Islam.

the koran demands all kinds of BS as does the bible, but you're still right.
I recomend "robert pape - dying to win"
there's overwelming evidence. suicide terrorism isn't about religious nuts going crazy. it's about targeted campaigns influencing public opinion in democracies.

Pistis
01-10-2008, 03:50 PM
I live in Britain.

My assessment is that we were attacked for a combination of reasons:

1) We were the most prominent member of the "coalition of the willing" supporting the US in its illegal invasion and occupation of Iraq. We occupied the whole of Southern Iraq until just a couple of months ago & we continue to occupy Afghanistan

2) We've been an active participant in the War On Terror, using English & Scottish airfields as conduits for the extraordinary rendition (torture) of most probably innocent ppl in near-despotic Eastern European and North African countries.

3) In the aftermath of 9/11, there was a disproportionate backlash against the muslim community in the UK. Consider the fact that Britain has had to deal with IRA terrorists for decades and even though there was a religious element to their terrorism (they're mostly Catholics & the English are Protestants) they were nevertheless not described by their religion. However, the tabloid media and the most vocal social commentators in the UK were quick to paint the whole Islamic community as terrorists.

All the attacks by Islamic terrorists (1 definite attack & 2 thwarted alleged attacks) on UK soil have come in the aftermath of our involvement in the invasion and occupation of Iraq & Afghanistan resulting in the radicalisation of a tiny minority of British-born muslims who now have the incentive to commit terrorist acts

4) We have the most lax immigration policy in Western Europe and this has allowed those that have an incentive to harm us access to our country

5) We have a long history of intervention in the Middle East since WWII and from our days of empire. We were also involved in the overthrow of Mossadegh in 1953 -- British oil was one of the companies that was threatened by the imminent nationalisation of Iranian oil by Mossadegh

... to name a few reasons

Todd
01-10-2008, 03:53 PM
you know what, no one here in europe is surpriced some muslims hate the usa, because of the way you go around the world killing ppl. as a matter of fact I cant believe you even have this debate. I hope you are aware about 1 million iraqis have been killed in irak and on top of that polluted with depleted uranium, causing sickness for the next 25 millions years. What you think , if you stop doing things like this, maybe you will be more liked ? ?????

do you only watch britney spears ?

noone I know is surpriced here, when you were attacked. (if you were)

it is nice you are waking up though...

I hope I don't start any arguments, but this is too much platitude for me to take. Sorry but it doesn't look like European pacifist nations are immune. I believe some disenfranchised individuals tore the hell out of France recently. Stop being so simplistic in your assessments of this. We all understand our problems here. I'm not so certain Europeans are more enlightened with knowing how to solve the issues. I know too much about how minorities are treated in Holland and Germany. Please. :rolleyes:

Lamont
01-10-2008, 03:59 PM
I wonder if some yanks think that if Ron Paul or the US changes its foreign policy, they will not be attacked when in the ME. The US caused enough hate to last for the next 40 years.

The consequences of your actions will be felt many years from now. Iraqis who saw their country being torn apart brick by brick will never forget, nor will they ever forgive!

The US will have to live with its sins for a while.

ionlyknowy
01-10-2008, 04:12 PM
Whoever made up that argument that they come over here to attack us because we live free and prosperous is an idiot.

Think about it, if YOU were the one living under the Taliban or whatever, and there was a place like America, where at least there is an illusion of freedom... would you want to go bomb them?

No, you would want to move to that country and help it... not bomb them...

What a silly argument.

The argument that holds more weight is the argument that they come over here because they want to put the world under Islamic rule. The Caliphate.

But even this argument has it's shortcomings. Like, no Islamic radical is organized enough to have a military, and jets, and ships, and everything else that could wage war against the American people.

All you have to do is make sure that every household (that isnt a criminal) has at least one gun. If ANY one where to come here, then they would be facing roughly 100 million armed citizens.