So, here are some things I believe:
- The war in Iraq was entered into for the wrong reasons.
- Until recently, I felt the prospect of our troops staying in Iraq (and Afghanistan) was not certain, and that withdrawing them as soon as appropriate would be wise.
There are many other things, but this is the crux of it for the point I wish to illustrate. I was talking with kissycat1000
who helped me to realise that the 'statement
' claiming that al-Qaeda are responsible for the attacks sets off the following chain of events:
- Any nation threatened by terrorism must adopt the position that the terrorists' position will not be benefitted by their actions. To do otherwise sets a dangerous precedent.
- Blair as expected lays down this message in response to the attacks.
- As a result, Britain must now not pull out of Iraq or Afghanistan any time soon, nor in a way that could be construed to be complying with the 'statement'.
The terrorists must know that by bombing and releasing their 'statement' that this would be the outcome:
- ..and are so wrapped up in their method and principle of the matter rather than the outcome that they don't care
- ..or they actually believe there is some other way we will respond despite the obviousness of the above.
I don't believe the terrorists believe the latter.
The only other option (and my hope) is that their 'statement' is falsified by dumb extremists on our side wishing to pin the attacks on 'the enemy', hoping to garner public support for the war.
The crux of the matter is it may be the case that al-Qaeda carried out the attacks but by specifically mentioning the reasons they are carrying out the acts of terrorism in their 'statement' they are effectively ensuring those reasons continue to exist.
All logical outcomes are therefore very depressing thoughts.