| Hank Chinaski |
07-07-2005 01:38 PM |
london bombings
Quote:
Originally posted by ironweed
Don't know the numbers, but my impression was that public opinion in Britain was never behind the invasion in the first place (except maybe for that window where Blair was saying Iraq posessed the capability to strike with bio/chem WMD in under an hour). Blair has stayed in office despite his terrible numbers on this issue simply because the Tories are more ineffectual than the Democratic party right now, if that can be believed.
But be that as it may --
War in Iraq/London bombings: Correlation or causation? If you think they would have happened anyway then Galloway is an ass and an appeaser. I for one would find it hard to look anyone over there in the eye and tell them that the war in Iraq has made the world a safer place. Maybe GWB should tell them that all he has to offer is blood, sweat and tears (their later albums) and see how that goes over?
|
The bombings in Spain and the bombings today were committed with standard explosives. A week ago I walked on the DC subway at rush hour with a carry on suitcase. It could have contained explosives. The Iraq war (putting aside it's ultimate value) was never intended to stop the presence of standard explosives.
The web site pronouncement included Afghanistan as justification, not just Iraq. So Iraq wasn't intended to stop this sort nor does it appear to have been the sole motivation. In fact, I believe Scotland Yard has broken up several imminent attacks over the past few years. Some sounded like they would have been very very horrific- worse that today if that matters. Some of these thrawted attacks were pre-Iraq invasion.
To claim Iraq was wrong because of today, is to claim that the only response to any of this is to hope it stops.
Remember, in Spain AFTER the announcement of withdraw from Iraq, they found more bombs on train tracks.
The situation is fucked. It is the situation we are in.
|