This terror will continue until we take Arab grievances seriously

Our focus must now be on the conditions that allow Bin Ladenists to recruit and operate

t must now be obvious, even to those who would like us to think otherwise, that the war on terror is failing. This is not to say that the terrorists are winning. Their prospects of constructing the medieval pan-Islamic caliphate of their fantasies are as negligible today as they were four years ago when they attacked America. It is simply to point out that their ability to bring violence and destruction to our streets is as strong as ever and shows no sign of diminishing. We may capture the perpetrators of Thursday's bombings, but others will follow to take their place. Moreover, the actions of our leaders have made this more likely, not less. It's time for a rethink.

The very idea of a war on terror was profoundly misconceived from the start. Rooted in traditional strategic thought, with its need for fixed targets and an identifiable enemy, the post-9/11 response focused myopically on the problem of how and where to apply military power. Once the obvious and necessary task of tackling Bin Laden's presence in Afghanistan had been completed, those charged with prosecuting the war needed a new target to aim at.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/attackonlondon/comment/story/0,16141,1524833,00.html

frustration... watching supposedly intelligent men making the decisions of fools.

we might have a chance of making a positive difference elsewhere.

Our problem is exemplified by George Dubya Bush himself: overwhelming arrogance in the face of no factual information, abuse of power and criminal activity, exploitation of other people's ignorance, chronic, intentional lying and self-deceit and just plain stupidity. If we could move the American population out of this Bush rut, we could change the world. But we must start here.

entirety of the four states which encompasses from Canada to Mexico, WA, OR, CA, NV, dogs barking are completely out of control and there is nothing law enforcement will do about it. In Chicago, when growing up, this was called "Disturbing the Peace" and was delt with. Neighbors asked neighors to take care of the sitution and if not police took care of it.

The most fundimental principle of Democracy is to be able to "live in your home in peace." This is no longer the case. I'd think I could extrapolate this fact to the entire nation. I always start with the basics and build a nation on a solid foundation. If our leaders cannot even take care of this most basic simple day to day situation we all live with how can they be expected to solve complicated problems?

are not their version of Muslims or that Isreal exist or that we exist at all.

I agree we should address issues we have with the Middle East but you are not going to be able to appease their radical fringe.

between the Muslim radical fringe and the christian radical fringe... Neither of these groups will be appeased.

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

whether it be a Muslim, a Christian, a Jewish, or any other extremist
group. But you can work to stop the moderates embracing the
extremists, and that's what we all need to demand of our leaders.

I think the Guardian article is very good, if a little kind to the
Coalition - I doubt if any of them ever really believed that they
were fighting terrorism. Afghanistan and Iraq were both
opportunistic exercises, with the goal of securing oil and building
a solid line of bases in the ME.

The best thing to come out of the London attack is that surely
everyone can now see that we are not safer than we were two years
ago, and therefore Bush's master plan has failed miserably.

...including our support for despotic regimes in arab and other muslim countries (and blind support for Israel, as well). Here I'm speaking of source organizations like the Muslim Brotherhood. Others, e.g. al-Qaeda, arose with our direct support and nurturing, but while they served U.S. short term interests at the time, they were never invested in the more corrupt aspects of our foreign policy. Still others originated in regional conflicts that we were at least partly responsible for or participated in. In a sense you're right, I think-- now that the djinn is out of the bottle, simply putting the cork back in will not solve the problem entirely. But we must understand that a just and multilateral foreign policy, that includes withdrawing support for oppressive regimes in the region, will go a long way toward defusing the anger in the muslim world. Much of that anger will likely spend itself more productively over-throwing their own tyrants, and perhaps establishing a few theocracies, but I doubt that those will last longer than a generation or two. Iran is likely the model for that. There will be difficult adjustments in the balance of power as a result, but again, these are the direct consequence of the situation that the U.S. has created and maintained for decades.

I have seen on this forum.

People must never excuse terror, but shouldn't we try to figure WTF is causing people to participate?

Oh no - that might require an apology or two.

we must do EVERYTHING in our power to destroy the CARTOON WORLD VIEW - before it destroys us all.

peace

Everyone who has studied global poverty – including the European governments – recognises that aid cannot compensate for unfair terms of trade. If they increased their share of world exports by 5%, developing countries would earn an extra $350 billion a year, three times more than they will be given in 2015.(1) Any government which wanted to help developing nations would surely make the terms of trade between rich and poor its priority.

This, indeed, is what the United Kingdom appears to have done. In March it published the most progressive foreign policy document ever to have escaped from Whitehall. A paper by the departments of trade and international development promised that “we will not force trade liberalisation on developing countries”.(2) It recognised that a policy which insists on equal terms for rich and poor is like pitching a bull mastiff against a chihuahua. Unless a country can first build up its industries behind protectionist barriers, it will be destroyed by free trade. Almost every nation which is rich today, including the UK and the US, used this strategy. But the current rules forbid the poor from following them. The European Union, the paper insisted, should, while opening its own markets, allow poor nations “20 years or more” to open theirs.

www.monbiot.com/archives/2005/06/06/a-game-of-double-bluff-/


It's the same as the San Jose Sharks playing against children. (I have to put this in terms Americans can understand.) What is fair about a foreign country's 3 gasoline filling stations having its markets open and having to compete against Exxon filling stations?

If one has travelled to foreign countries, you'd see that most all of the "money making" businesses are American. The banks, oil, weapons to kill, heavy equipment (but the Japanese have moved in on cars.).

things they want are really stupid. like don't speak out against their treatment of women. that's bullshit. get out of their country, cool. pay the true price of oil, cool (then maybe we will move on to other types of fuel). isreal needs to move back to it's original (stolen) borders. cool.

but you have to admit some of the shit they want is crazy. how do you negotiate with people like that.

and in turn lost and lost land. I am no fan of Israel but the people they took the land from did try to snuff them out a couple of times.

was being occupied at the time by the so-called palastinian. but the isrealis claim that the land was taken from them by these so-called palstinian's.

by the way would you say that the native americans in this country tried to snuff out the pilgrims. not bitching just asking.

but they are few, and they rely on popular support. And if our governments want to cut this support away, they will have to stop acting as if the world was a giant candyshop owned by one's grandma.

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

A Peace Conference would be the place to begin the dialog.

and from our stanchest ally no less... the neoCONs are going to be on the defensive from here on out.

i know they didn't expect their plans to unravel this fast. :nuke:

peace