# London Hit By Terror Attacks (What is the appropriate response?) **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [July 7, 2005, 10:15am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/london-hit-by-terror-attacks-what-is-the-appropriate-response/311438 "2005-07-07T10:15:03Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 8
**Author:** ![Evil\_One](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/45deac/32.png) [@Evil\_One](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Evil_One)\ **Post date:** [July 7, 2005, 7:14pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/london-hit-by-terror-attacks-what-is-the-appropriate-response/311438/141 "2005-07-07T19:14:32Z")
> [@Jinks](#): > > I do not see the war in Iraq as justice served. I see it only as revenge embraced. If revenge were the goal, we would have left with Saddam in tow while dusting our hands off with callous glee. Instead we are rebuilding the entire country and improving the lives of the citizens at great cost, both in money and lives. ---
**Author:** ![Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/e99b99/32.png) [@Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Diogenes_the_Cynic)\ **Post date:** [July 7, 2005, 7:16pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/london-hit-by-terror-attacks-what-is-the-appropriate-response/311438/142 "2005-07-07T19:16:43Z")
> [@gum](#): > > Originally posted by \*\* Diogenes the Cynic\*\* > > So you _do_ blame the Americans for the London bombings? Indirectly, yes. ---
**Author:** ![XT](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/xt/32/456_2.png) [@XT](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/XT)\ **Post date:** [July 7, 2005, 7:22pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/london-hit-by-terror-attacks-what-is-the-appropriate-response/311438/143 "2005-07-07T19:22:52Z")
> [@Diogenes the Cynic](#): > > Indirectly, yes. Care to elaborate exactly on how the bombings in London are America’s fault? This I gots to hear. -XT ---
**Author:** ![magellan01](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/45deac/32.png) [@magellan01](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/magellan01)\ **Post date:** [July 7, 2005, 7:29pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/london-hit-by-terror-attacks-what-is-the-appropriate-response/311438/144 "2005-07-07T19:29:05Z")
kingpengvin, rayh, First, my list of things to be done was by know means meant to be comprehensive. It was a quick reply to an inquiry. But, yes, doing those things wouild make us safer. Certainly not less safe. As far as civil rights. I, too, am a great respecterr of civil rights. And I think we should have as much and as many civil rights as the times allow. In moments of threat, they may need to, responsibly, be dialed back. In moments of great peace and tranquility, I’m all for increasing them. Why doesn’t this make perfect sense? ---
**Author:** ![Rashak\_Mani](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/ea666f/32.png) [@Rashak\_Mani](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Rashak_Mani)\ **Post date:** [July 7, 2005, 7:32pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/london-hit-by-terror-attacks-what-is-the-appropriate-response/311438/145 "2005-07-07T19:32:41Z")
> [@Evil One](#): > > Instead we are rebuilding the entire country and improving the lives of the citizens at great cost, both in money and lives. Was that the objective of the invasion ? Nice spin on things. ---
**Author:** ![WaryEri](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/w/ea666f/32.png) [@WaryEri](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/WaryEri)\ **Post date:** [July 7, 2005, 7:34pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/london-hit-by-terror-attacks-what-is-the-appropriate-response/311438/146 "2005-07-07T19:34:44Z")
> [@magellan01](#): > > In moments of great peace and tranquility, I’m all for increasing them. Why doesn’t this make perfect sense? Because rights are alot easier to give up then they are to get back. Ben Franklin understood that very well. Let them go for a sense of safety in a time of fear, and you may never see them again. ---
**Author:** ![Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/e99b99/32.png) [@Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Diogenes_the_Cynic)\ **Post date:** [July 7, 2005, 7:37pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/london-hit-by-terror-attacks-what-is-the-appropriate-response/311438/147 "2005-07-07T19:37:36Z")
> [@xtisme](#): > > Care to elaborate exactly on how the bombings in London are America’s fault? This I gots to hear. > > -XT It’s simple No illegal war = no bombings. The strong possibility of increased terrorism against the US and its allies was an easily forseeable result of our invasion of Iraq. Bush knew at the time he lied his way into the war and suckered Blair into going along with him that there could be retaliation against either country. The risk of such repurcussions was not justified by any defensive necessity for the invasion. The bombings in London are therefore an indirect, yet predictable consequence of a corrupt and cynical decision made by Bush to stage an illegal assault on Iraq. ---
**Author:** ![kidchameleon](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/k/898d66/32.png) [@kidchameleon](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/kidchameleon)\ **Post date:** [July 7, 2005, 7:40pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/london-hit-by-terror-attacks-what-is-the-appropriate-response/311438/148 "2005-07-07T19:40:06Z")
> [@Evil One](#): > > 1. I think the OBL was somewhat surprised by the USA’s reaction to 9/11. Before that, all we showed the world were half-measures and rhetoric. He might not have expected to have us crawl up his ass. Man, some people never learn from history. Just like it wasn’t over when the Germans bombed Pearl Harbor, it’s not over now! ---
**Author:** ![Orbifold](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/o/779978/32.png) [@Orbifold](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Orbifold)\ **Post date:** [July 7, 2005, 7:46pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/london-hit-by-terror-attacks-what-is-the-appropriate-response/311438/149 "2005-07-07T19:46:30Z")
> [@magellan01](#): > > As far as civil rights. I, too, am a great respecterr of civil rights. And I think we should have as much and as many civil rights as the times allow. In moments of threat, they may need to, responsibly, be dialed back. In moments of great peace and tranquility, I’m all for increasing them. Why doesn’t this make perfect sense? Perhaps because rights aren’t rights only when it’s convenient. Rights are rights all the time; they are not ours because government allows them to be so, but because we are human beings. Rights which are beholden to the whim of the government are not rights, but privileges bestowed upon subjects. (Man, where’s **Liberal** when you need him?) BTW, what exactly do you mean when you suggest that mosques be required to “cooperate”? Random searches of mosques without warrants? Handing over lists of worshippers to authorities? Or do you have something in mind which wouldn’t fly in the face of the First Amendment to the U.S. Constitution? ---
**Author:** ![magellan01](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/45deac/32.png) [@magellan01](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/magellan01)\ **Post date:** [July 7, 2005, 7:48pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/london-hit-by-terror-attacks-what-is-the-appropriate-response/311438/150 "2005-07-07T19:48:03Z")
> [@](#): > > The we need a measured response as stated above, good honest police work. No spectacular military actions that in the end achieve nothing other than creating new enemies who desire martyrdom. Having a number of people in prison for life may not be the cathartic reaction some people require, but it is the right thing to do. Treating terrorism as just another crime, one that can be solved and prevented by police work is what has allowed to the problem to grom over the past twenty years. I’ve not mentioned anything about military action abroad, my comments have been restricted to the home front. And I’m all for locking up all those responsible. But I’m just as interested–if not more–in preventing the next group of murderers to carry out their plans. > [@](#): > > I also agree that we must retain our freedoms and not remove freedoms of segments of society, otherwise what are we fighting for? Life. Civilization. ---
**Author:** ![GIGObuster](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/gigobuster/32/421_2.png) [@GIGObuster](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/GIGObuster)\ **Post date:** [July 7, 2005, 7:55pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/london-hit-by-terror-attacks-what-is-the-appropriate-response/311438/151 "2005-07-07T19:55:06Z")
> [@Diogenes the Cynic](#): > > It’s simple No illegal war = no bombings. > > The strong possibility of increased terrorism against the US and its allies was an easily forseeable result of our invasion of Iraq. Bush knew at the time he lied his way into the war and suckered Blair into going along with him that there could be retaliation against either country. The risk of such repurcussions was not justified by any defensive necessity for the invasion. The bombings in London are therefore an indirect, yet predictable consequence of a corrupt and cynical decision made by Bush to stage an illegal assault on Iraq. Not 100% sure that no illegal war = no bombings. But I do think it is a factor since we should never ever forget the fact that huge resources were diverted from hunting Al-qaeda to the misguided war in Iraq, add to that what Kos pointed on the ineptitude of this administration on disrupting the hunt for Al-qaeda cells in England: [http://www.dailykos.com/](http://www.dailykos.com/) > [@](#): > > Soto hasn’t forgotten: > > > [@](#): > > > > Lastly, as Tony Blair oversees the carnage and anger in his country, he may want to ask his good buddy George W. Bush why his administration crippled Blair’s domestic anti-terror efforts to track down and stop Al Qaeda cells inside Great Britain by exposing a known Al Qaeda asset at a time when the Brits were very close to nailing a ring of Al Qaeda cells inside the country? With today’s tragedy in front of them, don’t you think that British intelligence would have wanted to finish their work last fall in smashing London’s Al Qaeda cells before the Bush Administration blew a covert operation just so Bush could be reelected? > > More info on that blowing of that operative: > [http://www.dailytimes.com.pk/default.asp?page=story\_8-8-2004\_pg7\_42](http://www.dailytimes.com.pk/default.asp?page=story_8-8-2004_pg7_42) > > > [@](#): > > > > On 2 August, the Bush administration blew the cover of double agent Muhammad Naeem Noor Khan. A day earlier, Homeland Security Secretary Tom Ridge had announced a new alert against an Al Qaeda plan to attack financial institutions in New York and Washington. When the New York Times pressed certain administration officials for more information, they disclosed to the newspaper that the information regarding the Al Qaeda plot had come from a recently arrested man in Pakistan named “Khan.” The New York Times published his name on Monday. The later editions spelt out the full name. > > > > Prof. Juan Cole of the University of Michigan’s analysis is more daring, "The announcement of Khan’s name forced the British to arrest 12 members of an al-Qaeda cell prematurely, before they had finished gathering the necessary evidence against them via Khan. Apparently they feared that the cell members would scatter as soon as they saw that Khan had been compromised. (They would have known he was a double agent, since they got emails from him Sunday and Monday!) One of the 12 has already had to be released for lack of evidence, a further fallout of the Bush SNAFU (situation normal all fouled up). It would be interesting to know if other cell members managed to flee. Why in the world would Bush administration officials out a double agent working for Pakistan and the US against Al-Qaeda? > > The administration’s ineptness has repercussions. ---
**Author:** ![magellan01](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/45deac/32.png) [@magellan01](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/magellan01)\ **Post date:** [July 7, 2005, 7:58pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/london-hit-by-terror-attacks-what-is-the-appropriate-response/311438/152 "2005-07-07T19:58:28Z")
> [@Rashak Mani](#): > > Is it ? 🙂 > By magellan’s logic they should profile rednecks… after all they are very dangerous. Timothy McVeigh for example. :smack: When fighting crime you look for patterns, you hope for patterns. You take an isolated incident and try to equate that with the long pattern of attacks Islamo-terrorists have perpertrated on the civilized world? That’s just ridiculous, to use a word that is no doubt way to mild. ---
**Author:** ![John\_Mace](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/john_mace/32/185_2.png) [@John\_Mace](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/John_Mace)\ **Post date:** [July 7, 2005, 7:58pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/london-hit-by-terror-attacks-what-is-the-appropriate-response/311438/153 "2005-07-07T19:58:29Z")
> [@Diogenes the Cynic](#): > > As to the OP, the only proper response for us is to let British law enforcement do its job. We have no other role except, perhaps, to apologize for bringing this upon them with our own dishonesty in duping them into an illegal war. Typical “liberal” response-- create a victim where none exists. Are you serioiusly aserting that the Brits are incapble of making their own decisions? Didn’t the Downing Street memo prove that the Brits knew in advance that Bush was pushing for war no matter what? Blair went into the Iraq war with his eyes fully open. And he continues to support the war of his own will. Any claim otherwise is an insult to British and their government. ---
**Author:** ![magellan01](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/45deac/32.png) [@magellan01](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/magellan01)\ **Post date:** [July 7, 2005, 8:05pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/london-hit-by-terror-attacks-what-is-the-appropriate-response/311438/154 "2005-07-07T20:05:54Z")
> [@WaryEri](#): > > Because rights are alot easier to give up then they are to get back. Ben Franklin understood that very well. Let them go for a sense of safety in a time of fear, and you may never see them again. And Abraham Lincoln understood that desperate times may call for desperate measures when he suspended habeas corpus. ---
**Author:** ![Jinks](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/d9b06d/32.png) [@Jinks](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Jinks)\ **Post date:** [July 7, 2005, 8:06pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/london-hit-by-terror-attacks-what-is-the-appropriate-response/311438/155 "2005-07-07T20:06:16Z")
Feel free to insult our government. They obviously _didn’t_ think the general public were capable of making their own decisions. As evidenced by their misleading us before the referendum on the war. Blair may have had his eyes open but his hands were covering everyone else’s. ---
**Author:** ![Rashak\_Mani](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/ea666f/32.png) [@Rashak\_Mani](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Rashak_Mani)\ **Post date:** [July 7, 2005, 8:13pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/london-hit-by-terror-attacks-what-is-the-appropriate-response/311438/156 "2005-07-07T20:13:44Z")
> [@magellan01](#): > > When fighting crime you look for patterns, you hope for patterns. You take an isolated incident and try to equate that with the long pattern of attacks Islamo-terrorists have perpertrated on the civilized world? That’s just ridiculous, to use a word that is no doubt way to mild. Well we could see other patterns too ? Like constant meddling in islamic countries… constant toppling of regimes all over the third world. No ? Things don’t happen out of the blue… either you cut the evil from the root… or your just reacting to things. Killing a terrorist in one place while giving the next generation a reason for Jihad isn’t solving anything. What you suggested is a remedial solution that only worsen things long term. The problem is the broad strokes you suggest and throwing all muslims into the “may be terrorist” category. Especially when muslims living in the west are and will be a major factor in changing things in the Middle East. People go back and take with them some of the western cultural values that will corrode Islamic societies “backwardness”. ---
**Author:** ![XT](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/xt/32/456_2.png) [@XT](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/XT)\ **Post date:** [July 7, 2005, 8:13pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/london-hit-by-terror-attacks-what-is-the-appropriate-response/311438/157 "2005-07-07T20:13:50Z")
> [@DtC](#): > > It’s simple No illegal war = no bombings. Complete speculation on your part…and inaccurate too IMHO. After all, there were plenty of bombings BEFORE we invaded Iraq (9/11 immediately springs to mind as an example). Granted, there hadn’t been any in London prior to that…but maybe the terrorist just hadn’t gotten around to them yet. As to Iraq…well, we didn’t exactly drag the Brits in kicking and screaming against their will. They went along with the ‘illegal’ war just fine…AND they just voted Blair back into office for another term as well despite Iraq. So…I’m not seeing how its the US’s fault yet that London got bombed…even indirectly our fault. Cause and effect, I could make as good a case that its the Europeans fault for this mess in the first place (I can think of several historical incidents that lead to this at various times in history)…or I could make the case that the REAL group responsible is Bin Laden and his merry band who want power in the ME, and that its all just an excuse for them to do what they want. > [@DtC](#): > > The strong possibility of increased terrorism against the US and its allies was an easily forseeable result of our invasion of Iraq. Bush knew at the time he lied his way into the war and suckered Blair into going along with him that there could be retaliation against either country. The risk of such repurcussions was not justified by any defensive necessity for the invasion. The bombings in London are therefore an indirect, yet predictable consequence of a corrupt and cynical decision made by Bush to stage an illegal assault on Iraq. Why just the invasion of Iraq? I’d think that Afghanistan would be more of the key to be honest…after all, AQ was pretty close to the Taliban AND they had bases in Afghanistan. You seem to be putting all this on Iraq and the ‘illegal’ war, and while I agree with you it was a stupid thing for the US/UK to stick our collective cranks into, it seems to me that Afghanistan is more of the key, or at least enough of a key, to pissing off the terrorists and making them want to come after us. Iraq is just an excuse…Afghanistan though was the real deal. And its hard for me to imagine any other outcome in Afghanistan that DIDN’T have the US and the UK (and many other nations) involved there. -XT ---
**Author:** ![magellan01](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/45deac/32.png) [@magellan01](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/magellan01)\ **Post date:** [July 7, 2005, 8:15pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/london-hit-by-terror-attacks-what-is-the-appropriate-response/311438/158 "2005-07-07T20:15:35Z")
There are a few comments here that attempt to “link” the war in Iraq with attacks on the west. At least Diogynes has the courage of his conviction. Guys you can’t have it both ways. It seems that you want to attribute the cause to the war but are to chicken to come right out and say it. This is similar to some spaghetti-spine liberals in the US that insist that they support the troops but then celebrate every time there’s bad news (for us) from Iraq. And I’d like to point out that these murders were commiting their atrocities BEFORE we went to Iraq. Remember 9/11? Or the string of attacks going back 25 years? Blame America. Blame George Bush…George Bush bad…war bad…George Bush evil… He and the honorabl Tony Blair are gonn save your sorry asses in spite of yourselves. ---
**Author:** ![magellan01](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/45deac/32.png) [@magellan01](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/magellan01)\ **Post date:** [July 7, 2005, 8:21pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/london-hit-by-terror-attacks-what-is-the-appropriate-response/311438/159 "2005-07-07T20:21:06Z")
Excellent discussion point. I’m all for making the lives of Muslim terrorists and those who support them as miserable and uncomfartable as possible. But for those who join in the fight AGAINST them, I embrace them. I idolize them and hold them up to the world as shining examples of how decency and peace can prevail of murder and hate. I also think it is important that we act honorably in our theaters of war abroad. We should support the peoples right to govern themselves and live happy productive lives. ---
**Author:** ![carnivorousplant](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/carnivorousplant/32/3563_2.png) [@carnivorousplant](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/carnivorousplant)\ **Post date:** [July 7, 2005, 8:22pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/london-hit-by-terror-attacks-what-is-the-appropriate-response/311438/160 "2005-07-07T20:22:01Z")
> [@magellan01](#): > > There are a few comments here that attempt to “link” the war in Iraq with attacks on the west. It ceratinly doesn’t make terrorist organizations happy with us. 🙂 [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/london-hit-by-terror-attacks-what-is-the-appropriate-response/311438.md?page=7) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/london-hit-by-terror-attacks-what-is-the-appropriate-response/311438.md?page=9)