This morning, when I woke up, the news about the terrorist bombings in London was on NPR. There’s an interesting take on the subject over at vitalsecurity.org, but I don’t necessarily agree with the point of view in that particular article. I do want to offer my condolences to the families of the people who were injured and killed by the cowardly terrorist attack. I think that terrorist attacks are among the most cowardly and reprehensible of actions.
Innocent people should not be killed. As far as I know, the Koran does not condone the wholesale killing of innocent people. The Islamic fundamentalists have warped the interpretation of the Koran as badly as the Christian right has warped the teachings of the Bible.
This attack leads me to believe that in spite of everything George W. Bush says about the war on terrorism, Al Qaeda is doing well. In many ways, George W. Bush has become one of the best recruiting motivations for Islamic fundamentalists. Osama bin Laden said that the United States would attack and invade an Islamic oil-rich country and occupy it. Unfortunately, George W. Bush has done exactly that with Iraq. The invasion of Iraq was not justified in many ways, and the reasons that George W. Bush gave for doing so have proven to be mostly false or greatly exaggerated.
George W. Bush insisted that Iraq had weapons of mass destruction, yet no evidence of that has been found. He also insisted that Iraq was linked to Al Qaeda and a supporter of international terrorism… and yet that too has yet to be proven. Yet, these were the main justifications for the war in Iraq and the subsequent deaths of thousands of innocent Iraqis, American military personnel, Iraqi military personnel, and insurgents.
Was Saddam Hussein a dictator who deserved to be deposed? Yes, I believe he deserved it.
Was Saddam Hussein a danger to the countries nearby? Yes, I believe that too. He had previously fought several wars with Iran and invaded Kuwait.
Did the United States have the right to remove him from power? No, I don’t think what the United States did was justified. At least, not for the reasons given by G. W. Bush.
Did Iraq really have anything to do with George W. Bush’s War on Terrorism? No, I don’t believe so. The evidence found in Iraq following the invasion hasn’t shown Iraq to be a major player in international terrorism.
Did the invasion of Iraq give the Islamic fundamentalist terrorists more motivation? Yes. I do think Islamic fundamentalism got a strong boost from G.W. Bush’s invasion of Iraq. In fact, the invasion of Iraq was predicted by Osama bin Laden as I stated previously.
London, and the United Kingdom, has a much longer track record of dealing with terrorism than the United States. Most of their experience is due to the Irish Republican Army and its related splinter groups. However, the IRA seems to be much more courteous about their terrorist attacks, especially in recent times, as they’ve tried to minimize innocent civilian casualties. If a distributed coordinated attack like this can happen in London, it is very likely that a similar attack would be at least as successful in the United States.
The other problem with terrorism, and Bush’s “War on Terrorism” is that the money isn’t really being spent in an effective manner. A lot of the things done in the name of Homeland Security, are really not going to be effective in reducing terrorist activity. There are too many projects being done in the name of Homeland Security that have very little to do with actually improving the security of the United States and its people. Even more ridiculous are some of the “security measures” that have been instituted by DHS and the TSA.