As we discussed in part one, terrorism in general, and al Qaeda in particular, are again dominating the news. It's now just about impossible to find a report of any terrorist act (or quasi-terrorist act, like the recent failed car bombings in London), without reference to Osama bin Laden or his famous franchise. Interestingly, …
What is this, the Register/Indymedia crossover?
"where's the IT angle"
"I used to respect the register for the tech news"
I think he got it half-right
I think Krugman got it half right.
Yes, yes, the press is a big part of this mess. But even now, with the country overwhelmingly opposed to the vast majority of Bush's positions, the people inside the beltway are scared to stand up to him too hard. There's just too much 'common wisdom' that it's a bad idea to do so, and, well, they don't get it from the press, because they're the ones telling the press what to say.
It is still beyond me how so many Europeans take it upon themselves to criticize American politicians (actually just Bush and Cheney). Do you guys even try to find any media resources that support anything America does? Just because your media says Bush is an evil dictator (which is laughable) doesn't make it true. If you took the time to question your own biases, you might actually be quite surprised as to what you will find.
Europe is desperately trying to keep themselves out of conflict. With the problems of the first two world war's and the cold war, I don't blame them. However, Europe has gone back to a pre-WWII mentality of if I leave them alone, they will leave me alone. It's easy to think this, many of us Americans did, until nearly 3,000 people were killed one early morning. So while Europe continues to huddle in their narrow world perspective and turtle behind their "superior morals", countries like the US, China, Taiwan, Korea, and Japan will continue to realize we are in a global economy and our global investments need to be protected and expanded. Hope you guys enjoys 3rd world status.
And this is a tech site. Take your wanna be understanding of American politics elsewhere.
Don't forget that 'gut feeling' can mean 'intend to allow'
The Bush Government and their corporate backers benefited greatly from the events of 9/11, which they also wrote that they needed in the Manifesto for a New American Century (PNAC) 'in order to promote public support for these policies'.
In much the same way that Tony Bliar benefited from the 7/7 bombings on the London Underground, which are still not adequately explained.
So don't be surprised if once again, as even the Bible thumping midewest support for Bush and his bungling cronies fails another 'attack' on the US takes place just when all the agencies happen to be looking the other way. After all, the US public got behind invading Iraq, even though it was nothing to do with OBL and AQ, if Bush/Cheney arrange/allow the deaths of a few thousand more Americans they can call a state of emergency, cancel the elections and rule for all time (or until Bush Snr tells him it is time for bed).
Human body contains about 6 quarts of blood - call it a gallon and a half - a hundred thousand gallons divided by 1.5 is apprx. 66666.666666666666666667 people.
Interesting number. Anyway...
I still think Thomas C Greene is a transgender liberal sissy la-la who should spend it's time telling folks not to piss the US off - people who do tend to end up dead. Hello?
What's that sound?
Must be my bookmark for the Register going in the trash.
Although I agree with most of this article, and found it quite interesting, this is not the place for it. Most people come here for IT stories and a bit of humor thrown in as well. There are many other sites devoted to politics. Left or right, there's a site for you.
Stories without an IT angle are becoming more common here. Now we have to deal with name calling ("Bushie" still applicable to around half of Americans regardless of thier support for GW now). I'm not American but wonder how long it will be before the Reg targets my country for slander.
Thomas C Greene obviously has a political agenda, which is fine. Just let him post it somewhere else.
Hey what a great article...
Its a shame that most people who believe that Iraq had anything to do with 911 will be too busy trying to find the tubes to plug their computers into, commonly known as the interrrr-net ...will not get a chance to read it... That's assuming they can read!
This is a good feature, and while I agree with pretty much every word, I still think this has ended up at the wrong website... The Author realises that this is the Register, not Guardian Unlimited, right?
Is this the first test in El Reg trying to position itself as the last voice of freedom in an everchanging world, or a genuine mix up between El Reg's and the Guardians incoming news feed?
Fantastic read! Can't wait for final installment
Simply put, right on!
I couldn't have put it better myself (no, I really actually couldn't). I have very little real information to go on but like US Homeland Security Secretary Michael Chertoff I have a gut feeling although mine is that, as you say, Osama bin Laden is sitting somewhere laughing to himself at the fact that GWB has pretty much done the rest of his work for him since 9/11. If Osama wanted the rest of the world to see how morally wrong and corrupt the US government is then GWB is playing right into his hands. I feel sorry for the large portion of americans who don't agree with their country's foreign policies regarding violence because unfortunately, due to the current administration, they are being tarred with the same brush by a large part of the rest of the world.
Looking forward to the next installment of your article.
Why is Bush arming Sunni Al Qaeda?
Maybe not Osama, but Bush is arming Sunni muslims, some of whom are Al Qaeda in Iraq. Al Qaeda being Sunni muslim.
His boys have no way of telling whether the Sunnis have AQ sympathies or not. So he's arming them, and many of those weapons will end up being used against the US troops.
As far as I can see, he wants them to kill Shia, I guess to stir up a war with Iran (which is largely a Shia muslim country) giving them a war fever boost in time for the elections.
Or perhaps he wants to build up AQI into a credible force to attack rather than this civil war of small factions he faces now.
Maybe that's would keep the Neocons in power.
Bush benefited from 9/11? How? What proof can you offer? Which corporate backers got the benefit?
Bush is arming Sunni Al Qaeda? Where? How is Bush personally doing it? Can you prove it?
This doesn't belong on The Register. People are saying Bush is an evil genius planning world domination and in the same paragraph people explaining how he is such an idiot. These comments are made by conspiracy theorists who just rant about crap. If you can offer up proof to back any of these ridiculous claims, then do so. Otherwise you sound like a bat raving lunatic.
What a load of bullhocky
Point 1: This article has NO, NONE, ZIP, ZERO Tech relationship. Shame on the Register.
Point 2: The author is simply rehashing what the rest of the news media says- zero originality, and zero thought.
Point 3- The news media in Iraq has no clue since they can't manage to get out of Baghdad to actually see the country and report on what is happening.
Point 4: While there is a vocal minority in the US against anything Bush, AND the Democrats have resented both his original election and his re-election, AND the News Media prefers to print stories that support their own bias, NOT the true news or the opinions of those that DON'T agree with them, Bush's policies have so far prevented continued terrorist attacks in the US, strengthened the US economy, and is rebuilding the economy in Iraq, to the great satisfaction of the majority of the Iraqi population.
Point 5: Th majority of US citizens couldn't possibly care less about the opinions of the English, the other Europeans, nor the rest of the world.
Point 6: Calling names is childish.
Europeans have a right to criticize the self-styled "Leader of the Free World"
"It is still beyond me how so many Europeans take it upon themselves to criticize American politicians (actually just Bush and Cheney)."
As if Americans don regularly criticize foreign politicians. Criticizing foreigners seems to be such a frequent event in the USA that the people there don't even realize they are doing it.
And America frequently routinely expects foreign countries to follow its lead in foreign affairs. Americans frequently call their President, "The Leader of the Free World". Well, after labeling the US President "Leader of the Free World", why be surprised when residents of the free world criticize him.
As for the IT angle, as any professional engineer can tell you:
- IT is used in weapons of war and in the conduct of war.
- Developing new weapons of war drives a substantial part of IT development.
You couldn't be further removed from the truth if you tried. I don't know what media you've been watching, but certainy the British media don't represent bush that way. As a complete twat, yes. But so what, he is, get over it.
As for where we get off criticising US politics, again, get the fuck over it. The US needs crtiticising, and we're happy to do it. I don't mind if you criticise my government, (frankly, they're shite). In any case, ISTR that TCG is a US citizen.
This is called 'free speech', by the way, a right, like legal trials (to name but one of many), that the US now extends only to it's own citizens, and then only if it likes the look of them.
As for all the "The reg shouldn't publish stories like this" whining, I would have thought that the presence of rational journalism should be applauded WHEREVER it occurs.
All you tossers that keep posting 'I only want to see tech news' have your heads so firmly up your arses that it's frightening. If you want to hide from the real world, fuck off and read slashdot with all the other fanboys. Haven't you got the hang of the Reg yet ? It's a news site with a tech bias, not just a tech news site.
I for one would like messrs Page, Green, et al to continue unabashed with their insightful articles, which show less bias and more actual rationality than the average op-ed piece in the UK paper press, or even the once mighty and now totaly braindead BBC.
Coverage and opinion of this quality is becoming increasingly hard to come by in this new age of government approved FUD.
Congrats to the register, as usual, color me a die hard reg fanboy.
I guess that's why there are so many EU troops in Afghanistan then - they're "desperately trying to keep themselves out of conflict".
Re: EU troops in Afghanistan
I guess that's why the British military is pissed about other EU nations troops staying in their bases?
"People are saying Bush is an evil genius planning world domination and in the same paragraph people explaining how he is such an idiot. "
As one of that 60% "minority" of Americans that beliaves that the Bush administrations's policies have screwed this nation for generations to come, I have to agree with one part of your displeasure. People who accuse President Bush of being an evil genius ARE sadly mistaken.
IMO he's merely a fool who is a convenient stalking horse for Cheney, Wolfowitz, et. al., who are the true architects of the wholesale torching of the Constitution and the rights that it was supposed to protect.
I propose a simple test, Mr. Not Needed: If a Democratic administration had proposed warrantless wiretaps on American citizens, indefinite imprisonment without legal counsel or court trial, a record number of administrative letters which say, in so many words, "I don't have to obey the law that I just signed because I'm the President," made the Office of the Vice-President a de-facto fourth branch of government (not subject to Congress because it's part of the Executive and not answerable to the Executive or Courts because it's part of the Congress), and had saddled you and your children and grandchildren with a $9 Trillion Gross National Debt, would you still be saying "get off his back"?
...Or ould you be screaming about how those lousy, interfering, snooping, tax-and-spend, Liberal @#$%^&**s in the White House had sold us down the river and should be impeached and shot (not necessarily in that order)?
My favorite quotes...
"Hope you guys enjoys 3rd world status."
Take a nice little recee and look at the stats my fellow country-mate - it is we that are falling into third-world status (health care, internet access, poverty, education, etc. etc... - the list goes on and on). And thanks for proving my point on education. Next time you decide to represent the rest of us Yanks, please take the bother to learn the language.
"...time telling folks not to piss the US off "
What's that my totalitarian friend? Piss us off and we will kill you? Seriously? Are you wearing a Brown Shirt today?
"These comments are made by conspiracy theorists who just rant about crap. If you can offer up proof to back any of these ridiculous claims"
Someone needs to find an alternate news source to Fox.
"Bush's policies have so far prevented continued terrorist attacks in the US, strengthened the US economy, and is rebuilding the economy in Iraq, to the great satisfaction of the majority of the Iraqi population."
Wow. Speechless doesn't even begin to...
"Point 5: Th majority of US citizens couldn't possibly care less about the opinions of the English, the other Europeans, nor the rest of the world."
6% of the world's population, in an increasingly interconnected world, and the rest of you 94% can just piss off! We're America dammit! And if it wasn't for us, you all would be speaking German right now! And so the same old tired song goes. Sounds like a hyper self-indulgent, spoiled child throwing a tantrum at the fact that he is, in fact, not the sole center of the Universe.
As I so often find myself having to do these days - My sincerest apologies to our friends across the pond. Not all of us are such bullheaded troglodytes. They just happen to speak with louder voices.
Good (Un)Common Sense
I get tired of people attacking articles for silly reasons.
This affects a lot of people all over the world, it doesn't matter if it has an IT angle because it is important to get people thinking.
Criticism of the US and UK is really needed all over the world to draw up attention to the stupidity of the actions of these governments. You need to view things objectively and not be a blind supporter of anything because it will lead nowhere good.
If you can't take a little criticism you shouldn't be reading anything you should go shut yourself away in some backwards place and stay there and not get involved with the outside world.
Stop telling people how they should run their countries and their lives.
About the US government's 'friends' benefiting from the war:
Contracts for reconstruction were awarded to US companies with ties to people in the Bush government (large portions of shares owned, friends, etc.). Corruption on a rather grand and open scale because most people in the US will not believe it possible. Really none of the reconstruction money has actually gone into Iraq or to its people.
I could go on for a very long time but I wouldn't want to without citing evidence because I'll just get a backlash from someone.
@ Not Needed, you
...still believe it was AQ that brought the towers down - don't you? Seriously? Ok, now in the end it does not matter much whether they were indeed toppled by planes or precision-cut by thermite (gawd, look at those core-pillars with those precise angled cuts... in the basement...) as long as they fell. You can say what you want about all the conspiracy theories around the incident - but do take the time to actually look some of the material. You will find that a lot of people gained from the attacks, whole industries along the way of the wars justified by it. It is unmissable.
El Reg for adults
Here's a business idea for El Reg: Start a site that reports whatever the blazes you want to report in any way that you care to report it. Oh, and have a proof of age requirement to access the site. (Proof of age requirement to be maintained by an absence of comments entailing fingerpointing, 'facts' that cannot be substantiated in any way, sophomoric - at best - insults, and semi-literate cursing of others who are commenting.)
Or would all that reduce the requirement for a comments section to zero?
"Bush is arming Sunni Al Qaeda? Where? How is Bush personally doing it? Can you prove it?"
Actually, I can.:
It's not that they're even trying to keep it a secret. It's only a secret to those Americans who choose live with their heads up their asses.
And if you thought this was scary...
"President Bush, without so much as issuing a press statement, on May 9 signed a directive that granted near dictatorial powers to the office of the president in the event of a national emergency declared by the president."
Possibly coming to a TV screen to you just prior to the next presidental election?
Freedom vs Security
Regarding the US' current actions abroad, many people love quoting Ben Franklin, saying:
"Those who would give up essential Liberty, to purchase a little temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety."
Let's not forget the words of another great American, former president Ronald Reagan, who said:
"Freedom is never more than one generation away from extinction. We didn't pass it to our children in the bloodstream. It must be fought for, protected, and handed on for them to do the same, or one day we will spend our sunset years telling our children and our children's children what it was once like in the United States where men were free."
I'm not going to say that I completely agree with the US' presence in Iraq. Hell, I'd love it if the US just packed up out military stationed throughout the world, and brought them home. Our Nimitz-class aircraft carriers and our Seawolf- and Ohio-class submarines and our AEGIS cruisers can patrol our shores (much to the chagrin of the coast guard, to be sure), our F/A-18E Superhornets and our F-22 Raptors can patrol our skies, and our Rangers, and our Stryker brigades can patrol our borders with Canada and Mexico, and the rest of the world be damned...
Have fun, next time a dictator rises in Europe with a mind to control the entire continent. How bout you guys handle that one on your own, because as you so elegantly like to point out, it's not our job to police the world. Seems to me that the world only wants the US to be the police when THEY are the victim.
It's ok, we'll overlook that Saddam Hussein executed Iraqis merely because they spoke out against him. We'll even overlook his gassing of the Kurdish population in Northern Iraq. Yeah, Bush bullshit us when he said we were going in because Iraq actively supported Osama. That doesn't change the fact that Hussein was a brutal dictator who had engaged in "ethnic cleansing" and needed to be removed.
I didn't see any European outcry when the US worked to bring down Milosevic. Maybe he was just a little too close to your own homes for your own comfort??
My point is that the stated reasoning for the US' involvement in Iraq being BS, doesn't change the fact that being there, liberating a country from an oppressive dictator, is a good and right thing to do.
People refer to military men and women's death in Iraq as "pointless". I call it "selfless". These men and women knew when they signed on that they could be asked to give their lives for their country. These men and women are giving their lives, not to defend the freedom of their fellow Americans, but to grant that freedom to someone else. All the criticism by Europe and the rest of the world hasn't done a thing to give any Iraqi the freedom to express themselves. So sit back in your easy chair, go on claiming to know more about the situation than a man who gets a detailed briefing at least once a day, and keep playing armchair quarterback. I'll continue to be proud that my government has a conscience and willingness to sacrifice for the benefit of others.
@ not needed
Um, you have been paying attention right
1) Sept 12, 2001 - What was Bush's Approval rating again. I have this nasty feeling thta it was higher than on sept 10. Therefore, Bush got a bonus, and the public waived through his odd notion that saddam husien, a secular leader, (yes, he was a tinpot dictator, but he was no islamic extremist, or al queida lover) was supporting O.B.L. (which is ridiculous. O.B.L. wants to build a musilm extemist superstate from Turkey all the way over to Malaysia).
2) Ohhhh, a war is good for, lets see, oil companies, defence contractors, and Dick Cheney's former employers, whats their name again.
exactly where has the rest of the world got it wrong?
We do have pro bush news sources in the rest of the world. Its called News Coporation. I dont expect you've ever heard of them, I mean, they're only run by a nobody called Rupert Murdoch, and own a small TV network in the US thats named for some sort of Canine (I forget exactly which one), and only owns a few newspapers ;-P
Thanks El Reg
Please keep publishing these articles. As I'm sure you'll know from your stats, they are probably some of the most linked to on the site (particularly I imagine Thomas' debunking of the laughable aircraft liquid bomb plot); and some of the most valuable in preserving the spirit of enquiry that has much in common with the best of IT and science, even if they may not be directly IT related.
Trollin' in your mindless thread.
Seriously Not Wanted is Most Wanted - he provides me with reasonable lols.
As aside "If I leave them alone" mentality works pretty well for the Chinese.
Also since when has America ever acknowledged a global economy? They're almost as big protectionists as the French, Gambling anybody? They're view of Globalization is "we can sell you what we like, however you are not allowed to sell us anything." Bunch of retards, one of the biggest blocks to true globalisatiton - the doors swing both ways buddy.
As to iraq, why the hell did we go there anyway? I mean we know they had nothing to do with terrorism (like saddam would letter a second power operate in his country) and we knew he didn't have WMD, and we obviously weren't going to help the people... so why o why did we go? Just nuke the dust bowl and be done with it - if you're gonna do a job do it right or not at all.
As to Afghanistan - yeah great move there, how cheap is heroin nowdays?
Seriously who the hell cares if there's another terrorist attack? To quote a sage indvidual
""Look out! Terrorists are coming! We need to attack! We need to be on the offensive! The terrorists will get you!"
F--k the terrorists.
I'm not going to pay money so other people can kill innocent civilians in a faraway country, just to lower the chances that someone from that other country will come over and kill me or my family. That's bullshit. Terrorists hate me so much? Bring 'em on. If I die, too bad, that's all she wrote. If my friends die well shit, life sucks. It's not like I was expecting the world to deal me blackjack every day. "
A pretty much bang on assesment. You're more likely to get hit by a fridge from the space station then get blown up by a terrorist. I'd rather have that cash spent on fixing my ----ing buses! And the trains. And improve my broad band, shit with all the money we've pissed up the wall on the war on terror you could probably build me a moon base. If nothing else they could make some storm drains so places would stop flooding.
called to account in 2008
It takes four endless years to call to account an american president and the political elephant he rode in on. The clock is running. Congresscritters who too-wholeheartedly endorsed Bush policies have already been called to account. 2008 is also an election year for them. The electorate is not asleep. They are waiting.
Smug europeans will certainly be the first to find out if the al Qaeda in Iraq threat is real or not. It's cheaper and easier to launch attacks in europe first before taking their putative show on the road in "the Homeland". I wish you luck.
As for conspiracy, why risk exposure when even a failed (that is, buildings only catch fire and don't fall down) attack would galvanize the populace to accept reduced civil liberties and increased spending to friends. It just doesn't make political sense, and it's a logistical nightmare for an administration and a political party who can't even get the pork handed out expeditiously. It requires meticulous planning they just haven't shown in any other arena.
They missed a trick
By not calling themselves, say, Independent Real Al Quaeda in Iraq surely? Not as good with the nifty acronyms as our revolting cousins, hmmm?
I understand that Paris Hilton has been sending text messages to bin Laden from her iPhone.
I hit the trifecta!
stormy Chinese in 2008
The good thing about "the Chinese" is, that they only ignore the human rights of people that... uhm... have nothing we care about / we don't really care about. A few semi-harsh words are wayyy sufficient before we return to selling out.
@ anon 2008 election:
I have this strange gut feeling that it does not really matter who runs the whole business. But trust me, I would love to see that it does.
and thinking about it, with all the water, Britain will have an great surplus of fat river rats in a couple of weeks. That will make for an excellent export opportunity. If you find any spare turtles in the yard once the water retreats, don't let them buggers get away.
Typically leftist with half (or less) of the facts...
This video says enough for me.
Freedom vs Security, no Freedom AND Security
That's a false dichotomy. You can have both, and we did have both until Bobo the clown came to power and decided it wasn't his job to read memos or take actions.
I iz liking Matt's commentz...
Matt's commentz I iz liking...
"Seriously Not Wanted is Most Wanted - he provides me with reasonable lols."
I talk to guys like "Most Not Wanted" on a fairly regular basis, they're spoon-fed the same nonsense he is, and seem to like the flavr just as much as he does...
If this is El Reg piloting a new content-stream to see how readers react, I vote 'okay maybe'. Let's see how it goes.
No quibbles with the quality of the article - it's a good piece if a bit polemical. Maybe you're planning some contrary pieces later. I'd rather see one stream of more balanced analysis, tbh. It doesn't have to be entirely objective - in fact, cynicism is good. But I'd like to feel confident is hasn't reached its conclusions before it's examined the facts.
America slipping in "Leader of Free World" stakes
The land of the brave is becoming the land cowering behind a big fence. FUD !
re "Typically leftist with half (or less) of the facts..."
These would be the facts backed up with links above, as opposed to the 'facts' espoused in a mashup of an old movie on YouTube then.
Re: Typically leftist with half (or less) of the facts...
That noise that you can hear is Patton spinning in his grave.
Re: Freedom vs Security
"Have fun, next time a dictator rises in Europe with a mind to control the entire continent. How bout you guys handle that one on your own, because as you so elegantly like to point out, it's not our job to police the world. Seems to me that the world only wants the US to be the police when THEY are the victim."
Will you also be promising to bring home all of your corporate investment, not to heavily invest in that dictator's economy and not produce the iron and steel needed to build his army?
NO-ONE wants the US to be the world's police, especially when this particular officer happens to fund and support the local thugs who rob them.
"I didn't see any European outcry when the US worked to bring down Milosevic. Maybe he was just a little too close to your own homes for your own comfort??"
Where did you look - in Europe or in the US media? There were plenty of people calling for the US not to bomb Yugoslavia because they foresaw the ethnic cleansing that would follow and reports by the US government and military show that they predicted the same consequences.
You do realise that more of population of this planet are looking to be saved *from* the US than *by* the US, right?
Keep it up
These series of editorials are great, please keep them up and I applaud El Reg for having the guts to publish these articles.
“Point 3- The news media in Iraq has no clue since they can't manage to get out of Baghdad to actually see the country and report on what is happening.”
And you presumably can? Otherwise how do you know this?
“Point 4: While there is a vocal minority in the US against anything Bush, AND the Democrats have resented both his original election and his re-election, AND the News Media prefers to print stories that support their own bias, NOT the true news or the opinions of those that DON'T agree with them, “
How do you know what the “true news” is, unless you have access to the same sources the news agencies have and are able to spot selectivity and bias? Or do you have some other source of the ultimate truth?
"Bush's policies have so far prevented continued terrorist attacks in the US, strengthened the US economy, and is rebuilding the economy in Iraq, to the great satisfaction of the majority of the Iraqi population."
Did you miss the point Thomas made about bin bag laughing his head off because Dubya was doing the rest of the job for him? I’d go further – it’s a fair bet he knew that the US government would react to 9/11 attacks in exactly the way they did. That one act of terrorism has done more to destroy America than anything else since the 1812 war, and the sad thing is that many of your countrymen are too blind to see it. Bin Laden may be an evil scumbag and he hates the West, but he’s far from stupid.
And you could do with wising up on how terrorism and guerilla warfare works. Turn that stupid Hollywood film OFF and read up (from academic studies, not wikipedia) about how weaker forces can pin down stronger ones. At its peak, the Provisional IRA had a active strength of less than 1% of the British army but they effectively tied up a lot of troops in policing Northern Ireland. Baader-Meinhof was a tiny group, but West Germany had to spend a disproportionately huge amount of effort in tracking them down. Same with the Mau-Mau. EOKA. Eta. Black September. The resistance in occupied Europe during WW2. And the Vietcong for that matter.
"Point 5: Th majority of US citizens couldn't possibly care less about the opinions of the English, the other Europeans, nor the rest of the world."
Well maybe you should start doing so, old son. You see, we’re not all jealous of America, which is what you tend to think when we criticise – rather, we’re becoming increasingly concerned at what looks like the emergence of a bullying Fascist state where once there really was a beacon of freedom.
And us backward spineless Europeans have a damn sight more experience in dealing with terrorism than you do. We also know what war is really like – that’s why these days we don’t go in with all guns blazing as soon as we feel we’ve been slighted.
As things stand at present, al Quaeda doesn’t need to do anything to America until after Bush’s presidency comes to an end and the current climate of fear starts to subside (assuming it does). Once that happens, you can expect another attack. It’ll be the same as 9/11 – a quick vicious strike and then wait for the hysteria.
And it’s the destruction caused to American society by the fallout from that hysteria that is al Quaeda’s real aim.
"I'd rather see one stream of more balanced analysis, tbh. It doesn't have to be entirely objective - in fact, cynicism is good. But I'd like to feel confident is hasn't reached its conclusions before it's examined the facts."
Sometimes just sometimes there doesn't have to be a left and a right side to an argument... sometimes one side is just completely wrong. I'm not for one moment saying the article was completely wrong/correct but not everything has to be balanced.
I happen to agree with what he's saying, but would still like to read another persons 'opposite' opinion to his. All I see here are these people calling him names.
Turning a blind eye to history
No country is whiter than white, but if your going to step in and try and resolve issues in a country you need to make sure you have the higher ground in terms of morals and conduct, otherwise the country your in will see you as no better then the issue you have come to resolve. At the moment there is a lot of double standards floating around which is doing nothing to help the images of the countries supposedly stepping in. Some good examples being, the UK was responsible for Saddam taking control of Iraq in the first place, the US is currently a sticking point for the whole Mid-east conflict.
So bearing that in mind, if the US is the world police and only when it suits the Europeans then they are a very corrupt police force.
Believe it or not, London, in particular, was under terrorist threat for a number of years before 9/11, before most of the average americans could actually tell you where Europe was even. Where was the US world police then, oh yeah they were supporting the terrorists that were trying to blow us up, thanks for that.
By the way as a Police force shouldn't you be addressing some African issues, as there's countless pointless deaths happening there at an alarming and saddening rate, but seeing as they have nothing to offer the US administration in it's quest to become an Empire through economic power, there's no point in interferring I suppose.
If history as taught us anything, it's taught the Brits empire building doesn't work and consumes a lot of resources, if we'd have listened to the Dutch we would have ditched our Empire building (which was through a combination of commerce and military, ring any bells yet, history seems to be repeating itself).
Keep it on !!!
As others (lots actually) have said, very good article, which I believe is on topic since at least the IT angle, IT being a grandson of maths, is reprensented by the facts rather than Fox News ;-)
Keep it ON, El Reg !!!
As for the sadly usual "Europe has been saved by the US" low-education rethorics, I suggest to Fox-educated people to try to read history (Fox, indeed, failed to broadcast that) :
Allow me a couple of comments on the quotes of this article:
"White House flack Tony Snow summed it all up, explaining to sceptics that, "when somebody tries to argue that al Qaeda in Iraq is not a key part of the problem, it creates a basis for saying, well, you need to go someplace else"."
Yes, Tony, and basically, this is probably what history will recall. They're just insurgents, and they probably don't get a damn about Al Qaeda. The problem is the US troops being in the wrong place and doing the wrong thing.
"Interestingly, the NCC report says: "[the real] al-Qaeda will probably seek to leverage the contacts and capabilities of al-Qaeda in Iraq (AQI), its most visible and capable affiliate, and the only one known to have expressed a desire to attack the homeland". (our emphasis)"
Brilliant. So, rephrasing this, it's actually not sure al-Qaeda is at all connected in command with AQI ??? Taking the WWII comparison, was there any doubt whatsoever that Army Group North of Germany would "leverage the contacts and capabilities" of Army Group Center, in Soviet Union, in order to crush them ? Surely not, same army, same command.
That NCC claim stresses the point there's no fact behind the "connection" between AQI and Al Qaeda.
Dear Bush supporters,
Please explain your lack of dissappointment in your leaders abilities to deliver the criminal responsible for 9/11.
Bush has failed to deliver and you don't care. Why?
At last, someone has spoken out and said the truth, well researched also.
Pity that some pathetic hypocrites pretend that this never happened and don't want to know anything about it.
I also thought the article was quite appropriate. The register frequently posts articles that are not strictly IT... like in "Odds n sodds" category,
So its a damn good article.
I've always found the whole
"America came and saved you during world war 2" thing kind of funny.
The American public wanted nothing to do with the war in Europe and were quite happy to have there fingers in their ears going "lalalallalallaala don't carez about your hitler - as long as he's over there." So all the crap about appeasment can get knotted - The rest of Europe had no army, just a bunch of left overs from WW1. Rooservelt on the other hand could see Hitler for the evil that he was.
The only reason the American public decided to join the war was becouse the Japanese bombed Perl Harbour (God bless'em) and if it hadn't been for that particular event the Germans would of won the War in Europe.
Another thing that won the war for the Allies was the fact that Hitler was crazy and busy fighting wars he couldn't win (Seriously learn a lesson about fighting on two+ fronts please. Russian front was plain old retarded - learn a lesson from Napolian.) Also if Hitler had just got off his behind and invaded England instead of embarking on his failed air war. Or if he'd not bothered with the Blitz and kept up his strategic bombing of the RAF. The war would of gone very differently.
Basically what won the war was a lot of bad planning on the part of the Axis, if it had concentrated on securing Europe/Asia and Africa, America would of just sat back and let them - afterwards, well... we can only wonder what would have happend.
Still no proof
So I've been called an idiot, a retard, a liar, and blind. Yet, not a single person here has been able to show any of the following:
1) AQ planned 9/11
2) Bush purposefully hurts people
3) Bush/Cheney personally profits from the wars
4) The United States is taking over the world
All conspiracy theories. Link me to solid evidence, by a reliable news source (not some crackpots blog) that proves this. You can't just give me some random statement like "look at the facts!!!", what facts? The "facts" I look at tell me a different story. Or my personal favorite, "THINK ABOUT IT!" I have, and I think you're on medication.
As for everyone having their own opinion, I agree completely. But does that mean I'm not allowed to tell you your opinion sucks? Because then we only are allowed our own opinion when you agree with it, right?
Now the whole WW2 thing is completely separate and being how much I have studied and love learning about WW2, I will comment on the previous statement about America wanting nothing to do with WW2.
You are absolutely 100% correct, America did want to stay out of WW2. We took a stance of help economically by donating money and war supplies to Britian, but refused to send troops due to not having enough support. Before the Pearl Harbor attacks, there were those who favored becoming involved and those who opposed, and the majority opposed. Our country was in the middle of a depression and people felt we had to focus on issues at home and rely on diplomacy (an interesting parallel to today, right?) Well, low and behold, on December 7th, 1940, the Japanese Empire launched a surprise attack killing a couple thousand Americans (sounds familiar yet?) As FDR called it a day that would live in infamy, the country suddenly become 100% committed to defeating the Axis.
We declared war on Japan. A few days later, Germany and Italy took it upon themselves to declare war on the US. On Omaha beach in Normandy, the German defenses were perfectly laid out, well entrenched, they literally did everything right. The only way we defeated them was sheer American will power (we took amazingly heavy losses, and that didn't one bit stop the boys from pushing forward). This type of bravery was seen again in Bastogne at the battle of the bulge, where the 101st airborne single handedly held back the entire German army.
This isn't to say the British and Canadian forces didn't perform miracles themselves, because they did. The battle of Britain is one of the most amazing stories in history. I'm merely just trying to make a point.
Dear El Reg,
Please stop. The far-left rantings Mr. Greene spews have their place but it is certainly not here. I realize that his anti-Bush and anti-America ravings may result in more temporary traffic but it really starts to cover the publication in the colors of the mud and bile that Greene spouts. End of niceties.
Greene's opinions are built on suppositions based on assumptions based on his virulent, blinkered, left-wing ideology. He is in the camp of the 9/11 conspirators, the 7/7 conspirators, Madrid, Bali, et al. A denier of reality.
Apparently, he would have had the world turn a blind eye to saddam's atrocities, which by many estimates cost a million lives during his decades in power, saddam's defiance and gaming of a dozen UN resolutions after the first gulf war. He attacked Iran and Kuwait for their oil, he fired scuds into Israel to draw them into the conflict. He fired scuds into Saudi Arabia. He praised Palestinian suicide bombers for killing Israeli civilians and paid $25,000 to their families. He and his family and cohorts tortured, raped and killed people for power, profit and pleasure. He has been accurately portrayed as one of the most evil dictators in modern history. He needed to be stopped. Someone had to have the courage to it.
While the war in Iraq has been mismanaged, it was a necessary war. It brought into view the violent extremists that circulated just below the surface in much of the greater middle-east. It was akin to lancing a poisonous boil, the filth that spills out is repulsive to the faint of heart but its expulsion is needed to save the body.
Few expected the enormous amount of internecine Muslim violence that would pour from this pustule. No one was prepared for it and indeed it would have been nearly impossible to foresee this, lacking a crystal ball.
The fact remains that the boil was lanced, shit pudding came out of it and it needs to be cleaned up and healed. Even the weak at heart can see that.
Those that run away screaming and foaming at the mouth about the procedure should stop hindering the efforts to correct a condition that had spread its poison around the world for years.
I don't believe saddam had any connection to 9/11, although he praised it as did many other Muslims around the region. Iraq is in the middle of the region that breeds, succors and encourages the most violent forms of Islamism and it has vast oil wealth that could (and was) turned to supporting terrorism.
It is in the West's best interests to encourage true democracies that can work with the international community to counter the area's ancient tribal systems.
Thomas Greene and his ilk sit at their computers and frantically type out their juvenile (bushies? please...) diatribes against everything connected to Bush and the current administration. Why doesn't Greene suggest some courses of action to fix the world's ills? Perhaps a giant group hug to stem the centuries-old Sunni-Shite conflict. Maybe another one to end the genocide in Sudan. What about the Israel-Palestine conflict?
When Thomas can come up with something besides sniping, ankle-biting tirades against Bush and America, publish him. Otherwise, leave him to publish his delusional screeds on moveon, huffpo, codepink and other fringe sites.
Thomas Greene's ranting reminds me of the South Park cartoon where the characters start shoving food in their asses and shit comes out of their mouths.
Resumption of niceties.
I do appreciate the Reg's policy of printing responses that include cuss words.Stop taking so frikkin long though, surely the boys can read and approve a post in less time than it takes to down a pint. I will enclose proper payment to ensure faster pint-downing and therefor faster posting of umm, posts. Bless
- Xmas Round-up Ghosts of Christmas Past: Ten tech treats from yesteryear
- Special Report How Britain could have invented the iPhone: And how the Quangocracy cocked it up
- Analysis Microsoft's licence riddles give Linux and pals a free ride to virtual domination
- Massive! Yahoo! Mail! outage! going! on! FOURTH! straight! day!
- Bring it on, stream biz Aereo tells TV barons – see you in Supreme Court