1) If one were to think of the War on Terror as a game, the recent bomb incidents would have to be scored as 2.5 points for the British, .5 for the terrorists. Of three bombs, two were discovered and disarmed and the third was rather ineffective. Further, the capture of two of the bombs intact and the two would-be bombers in Glasgow set up the British for some serious advantages in rounding up the rest of the bombers.
Unfortunately, it isn't a game and score isn't kept in any rational fashion. In the eyes of the media and many other people, only the terrorists' points count, so the fact that one of their attacks sort of succeeded means that this is considered an overall loss for the British.
2) Once again, the biggest element involved in stopping a horrific terrorist attack hasn't been the consciences of the terrorists or the actions of the authorities or even good intelligence, but astonishingly good luck by the authorities and incompetence of the terrorists. Much like the Millennium Bombing plot , the first World Trade Center attack, and countless other examples, we've been far more lucky than good in the war.
And for the most part, that's been sufficient. This is the kind of war where we can thwart 999 plots, fail to stop one, and have it perceived as a complete defeat.
3) As far as I can tell, the only identification of the bombers has been descriptions of them as "Asian." Does anyone seriously think that they might be Hong Kong natives feeling betrayed by the British turning them back over to Communist China? Buddhist monks? Faluun Gong members protesting their treatment by the Communist Chinese? Burned-out Japanese salarymen? Angered descendants of Korean "comfort women?" Taiwanese seeking recognition as an independent nation? Cambodians seeking the return of the Khmer Rouge?
Nah. In Great Britain, "Asian" includes Pakistanis -- one of the largest ethnic groups there. And it has become, by extension, inclusive of most people from Muslim nations.
4) Let's be utterly honest here. When the news of the two captured bombs first broke, who among us did NOT immediately associate it -- with absolutely no other evidence at hand besides "big car bombs planted in places guaranteed to kill large numbers of civilians" -- with Islamists?
Whenever something horrific like this happens -- or almost happens -- the first thought of nearly everyone is that the perpetrators are likely to say such things as "Inshallah," "Allahu akbar," and pray facing Saudi Arabia five times a day. And that reputation is one they have the old-fashioned way -- they earned it. The deliberate mass slaughter of civilians has become, for better or worse, intertwined with most people's perceptions of Islam.
As someone far wiser than I pointed out, it's gotten to the point when a prominent Muslim announces that they fear a wave of persecution against Muslims, the first thing that most people think is "Jesus Christ, what have they blown up this time?"
5) Those who tie the attack in to the war in Iraq are, tacitly, enabling the terrorists. By granting the linkage that the terrorists claim, they are partially validating the justification of the attacks.
By any reasonable standard, there is absolutely no justification for such things as the bomb plots in London and Glasgow. Only sociopaths think that the slaughter of innocents who have virtually no say in government policy is a legitimate response to the policies of that government. But we have, by and large, become inured to such claims and tend to accept these acts of inhuman barbarity as "predictable" and "understandable," some even blaming the obscenities on the governments whose policies are used to justify these attacks.
There is an old saying that "you can't reason someone out of a position that they didn't arrive at reasonably." (Or something to that effect.) In this case, the position of the terrorists is that they feel not only justified, but compelled to commit mass murder of the innocent to protest what they perceive as injustices. The first priority should not be to address their perceptions, but to stop the mass murders. Once the innocents are safe, the grievances of the terrorists can -- and should -- be addressed.
(Hmm... that could be another whole posting later. Better save more development of that thought for its own piece...)
The British were very lucky. As many have noted, the London bombs were thwarted by a bunch of drunks, ambulance attendants, and a tow-truck operator -- aided and abetted by a healthy dose of ineptitude of the terrorists. And the Glasgow bombing could have been considerably worse, with the fickle finger of fate helping the Brits and hindering the terrorists.
They say that fortune favors the bold. I sincerely hope that is the case.
Comments (40)
Yes, the Brits were lucky. ... (Below threshold)1. Posted by Francis W. Porretto | July 1, 2007 6:18 AM | Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
Yes, the Brits were lucky. But it's in the nature of a guerrilla insurrection, which is what modern-day terrorism most closely resembles, that the insurrectionists can "lose" most of the time yet win in the long run.
A terrorist campaign aims at defeating the target by undermining his morale. It takes an awful lot of failed bomb plots to offset the psychological power of one successful one.
1. Posted by Francis W. Porretto | July 1, 2007 6:18 AM |
Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
Posted on July 1, 2007 06:18
2. Posted by JFO | July 1, 2007 6:32 AM | Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
Very nice post Jay Tea. I feel bad for the Brits - first the IRA for years now this. They are an admirable country. They lived through the Blitz, the IRA and continued to live their lives as normally as possible. They appear to be doing the same now.
2. Posted by JFO | July 1, 2007 6:32 AM |
Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
Posted on July 1, 2007 06:32
3. Posted by WildWillie | July 1, 2007 8:13 AM | Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
The question isn't "What do they look like" it should be " Guess my religion." This is very likely believers in the "Religion of Peace." ww
3. Posted by WildWillie | July 1, 2007 8:13 AM |
Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
Posted on July 1, 2007 08:13
4. Posted by Gianni | July 1, 2007 9:06 AM | Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
Well, if we cant reason with people who arrived at a position they arrived at unreasonably, why even allow the lib trolls here?
Terrorism is a bumper sticker, we need to talk(cept on Fox, who the left evidently feels is a greater threat to the safety of Americans than Iran, Syria, islamoterrorists, etc) Christianity is as threatening as Islamofascists, Breck boy cares about poverty, etc etc etc
4. Posted by Gianni | July 1, 2007 9:06 AM |
Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
Posted on July 1, 2007 09:06
5. Posted by Jeff | July 1, 2007 9:08 AM | Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
"The first priority should not be to address their perceptions, but to stop the mass murders. Once the innocents are safe, the grievances of the terrorists can -- and should -- be addressed."
Jay ... the only way to stop the mass murders is to kill all the jihadists ... and then we really don't have to -- and never should -- address their grievances.
Sometimes life sucks and just because someone has a grievance doesn't mean that we have to address it.
5. Posted by Jeff | July 1, 2007 9:08 AM |
Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
Posted on July 1, 2007 09:08
6. Posted by Gianni | July 1, 2007 9:14 AM | Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
We cant reason with them, they only know 1 thing, fear.
The only way to stop a bully is to punch him in the nose, hurt him so bad he cowers back into his corner. All of the BS we, well, libs for the most part are doing now only supports the islamoterrorist agenda.
Give them a trial? F THEM, those guys in Glasglow should have been thrown back into their jeep. I for one would have enjoyed seeing/hearing them cry for us 'infidels' to help them out.
Sorry guys, Im finishing up my afternoon tea, will be there in 10, and then, 'Smores' for everyone.
6. Posted by Gianni | July 1, 2007 9:14 AM |
Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
Posted on July 1, 2007 09:14
7. Posted by Robert the Original | July 1, 2007 9:37 AM | Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
What I have Learned:
Hardly a day goes by, I'm told, that the mayor of London does not pander for Muslim votes in some way or other.
He supports none of the anti-terror stuff proposed by the Blair (now Brown) Government and yesterday, right on schedule, vouched for the Muslim groups that are their center of terror.
Beware Londoners, lest you show fear or issue a sideways glance at a Mercedes driven by an "Asian" and smelling of gas.
If this happened in the US, Imams would be driving all sorts of Mercedes - smelling of gas - up to airports and requesting special stuff.
Any misstep and the ACLU will sue your balls off.
If you see such a vehicle, your best bet is to greet it with a wide smile and hand over any free coupons you may have about you.
And make a point not to enforce immigration law or border control. Be sure they have access to lawyers with unlimited appeals, paid by the State. Make good and sure that their education is paid for them and that they have free health care, before and after.
In short, take no action against Muslims in any way. If one is standing on your foot, thank him and give him a tip.
7. Posted by Robert the Original | July 1, 2007 9:37 AM |
Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
Posted on July 1, 2007 09:37
8. Posted by xray | July 1, 2007 9:57 AM | Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
The UK used to be an admirable country, but their liberals have destroyed it with their PC-diversity nonsense. The difference over the last 8 years I have traveled there has been amazing. They have had the cultural equivalent of terraforming performed on them. What the hell happened to the proud and independent Scots heaven only knows. They are now nothing but children looking for the next teat to nurse on. I don't plan on going back; it is rather sad to see the final days of an old culture and country.
Their liberal leaders brought them death, and our liberal fools would do the same in the USA. Fortunately, we are not inclined to go peacefully into their dark night and will match them 20 deaths for each of ours. We would be much better off if liberals just went ahead and slit their own wrists while not insisting we slit ours as well. Then we could fight the enemy without worrying about the liberal stab in the back.
8. Posted by xray | July 1, 2007 9:57 AM |
Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
Posted on July 1, 2007 09:57
9. Posted by Mitchell | July 1, 2007 10:25 AM | Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
"Asian" in England can mean Pakistani or Banghledeshi, apparently.
Lucky these bombs apparently didn't explode as intended (they were nail bombs). Next time we may not be so lucky.
9. Posted by Mitchell | July 1, 2007 10:25 AM |
Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
Posted on July 1, 2007 10:25
10. Posted by kim | July 1, 2007 10:33 AM | Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
Middle Eastern is Asian to the Brits, too; it's across the Bosporus.
===================================
10. Posted by kim | July 1, 2007 10:33 AM |
Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
Posted on July 1, 2007 10:33
11. Posted by Darleen | July 1, 2007 10:34 AM | Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
Once the innocents are safe, the grievances of the terrorists can -- and should -- be addressed.
Hmmm... let's see now ...what do the terrorists want?
Hand over Rushdie to Iran
Withdraw all Westerners from the Waqf [Muslim lands]... which of course includes dismantaling Israel and handing back Spain
Hand over Ayaan Hirsi Ali
Never offend Muslims again, either by speech, book, or cartoon.
Realize that Islam will soon become the dominant ideology over the world and prepare yourself for the inevitable
That sound like a good start on a list of grievances, J?
Or what, exactly, would you consider a "legitimate" terrorist "grievance" that does NOT involve Western capitulation?
sheesh
11. Posted by Darleen | July 1, 2007 10:34 AM |
Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
Posted on July 1, 2007 10:34
12. Posted by Semanticleo | July 1, 2007 10:58 AM | Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
It's becoming clear that the majority of the
most eccentric Muslims couldn't organize a trip to the bathroom, much less an international consipiracy.
But, like the Soviets, they are easily caricatured
into something they are not; competent.
Wingnut Nation needed a new bogeyman when the
crumbling facade of Soviet World Domination finally gave way to reality.
Reagan assumes credit for the fall, but it began long before his tenure.
Remember how the Reaganites sold us the 'Peacekeeper' missle technology?
For public consumption they created a chart
which seemed to say the soviets had bigger and
better missiles than our puny arsenal.
Funny thing was, the soviets still used the archaic liquid fuel boosters while ours were
solid fuel and much smaller than the ancient behemoths.
It worked. We bought it. Then they lost their bogeyman. They needed a new one. They got it,
and us.
12. Posted by Semanticleo | July 1, 2007 10:58 AM |
Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
Posted on July 1, 2007 10:58
13. Posted by C-C-G | July 1, 2007 11:17 AM | Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
Leo, how did these incompetent Muslims manage to pull off 9/11 then?
13. Posted by C-C-G | July 1, 2007 11:17 AM |
Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
Posted on July 1, 2007 11:17
14. Posted by Darleen | July 1, 2007 11:18 AM | Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
Cleo
Islamism was created by "wingnuts"?
Geez, Thomas Jefferson was really before his time, eh?
14. Posted by Darleen | July 1, 2007 11:18 AM |
Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
Posted on July 1, 2007 11:18
15. Posted by Semanticleo | July 1, 2007 11:38 AM | Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
"Islamism was created by "wingnuts"?
They don't create anything. They exploit.
15. Posted by Semanticleo | July 1, 2007 11:38 AM |
Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
Posted on July 1, 2007 11:38
16. Posted by C-C-G | July 1, 2007 11:41 AM | Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
Gee, Leo, so do you! You exploit threads like this to push your own wacko theories.
I expect you to denounce yourself now.
16. Posted by C-C-G | July 1, 2007 11:41 AM |
Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
Posted on July 1, 2007 11:41
17. Posted by Semanticleo | July 1, 2007 11:44 AM | Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
"You exploit threads like this to push your own wacko theories."
I jump at the chance to pull back the curtain and let light in where precious little has been before.
Need a pair of shades, do you?
17. Posted by Semanticleo | July 1, 2007 11:44 AM |
Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
Posted on July 1, 2007 11:44
18. Posted by C-C-G | July 1, 2007 12:18 PM | Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
Not me, Leo, but you need a shovel for all the manure you toss around.
You ignored my earlier question... if the Muslims are so inept, how'd they manage to pull off 9/11?
18. Posted by C-C-G | July 1, 2007 12:18 PM |
Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
Posted on July 1, 2007 12:18
19. Posted by ODA315 | July 1, 2007 12:22 PM | Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
"sssshhhhh............there's three little silver men with big heads in a hanger in Roswell. Dick Cheney knows all about them. He and the unibomber were a member of their space ship crew when it landed but they were thrown clear. Ted tried to tell everybody but Karl Rove shut him up to protect Cheney..........."
Semantiwacko
19. Posted by ODA315 | July 1, 2007 12:22 PM |
Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
Posted on July 1, 2007 12:22
20. Posted by C-C-G | July 1, 2007 12:25 PM | Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
ODA, is that the same group of three little silver men that is hiding Elvis, Jimmy Hoffa, Bigfoot and the Loch Ness Monster?
20. Posted by C-C-G | July 1, 2007 12:25 PM |
Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
Posted on July 1, 2007 12:25
21. Posted by Semanticleo | July 1, 2007 12:34 PM | Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
"if the Muslims are so inept, how'd they manage to pull off 9/11?'
They don't have a monopoly on ineptitude.
21. Posted by Semanticleo | July 1, 2007 12:34 PM |
Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
Posted on July 1, 2007 12:34
22. Posted by C-C-G | July 1, 2007 12:38 PM | Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
No, they don't, as you're demonstrating admirably. Please, keep it up.
22. Posted by C-C-G | July 1, 2007 12:38 PM |
Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
Posted on July 1, 2007 12:38
23. Posted by Semanticleo | July 1, 2007 12:44 PM | Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
As well I shall. Bless you my child.
23. Posted by Semanticleo | July 1, 2007 12:44 PM |
Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
Posted on July 1, 2007 12:44
24. Posted by bryanD | July 1, 2007 1:11 PM | Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
You ignored my earlier question... if the Muslims are so inept, how'd they manage to pull off 9/11?
_ccg"
http://www.onlinejournal.com/archive/10-30-01_Hopsicker-printable.pdf
And don't forget Rumsfeld's dimunution of NORAD's Continental Air Sovereignty doctrine in favor of scaling down/streamlining defenses (for the 21st century or something)
24. Posted by bryanD | July 1, 2007 1:11 PM |
Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
Posted on July 1, 2007 13:11
25. Posted by Darleen | July 1, 2007 1:12 PM | Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
Cleo
They don't create anything. They exploit
Oh! Please do expound on how Thomas Jefferson "exploited" the Barbary Pirates.
Poor oppressed Muslims forced by nasty colonial wingnuts into having to sack American ships and enslave the sailors...
The HORROR of it! America bad to the bone from the start. How ever do you stand it, Cleo?
Shall I start a fund for you to escape this hell hole to the utopian country of your choice? Cuba? Iran?
Why shouldn't you just go there instead of trying to make here over in their image?
25. Posted by Darleen | July 1, 2007 1:12 PM |
Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
Posted on July 1, 2007 13:12
26. Posted by C-C-G | July 1, 2007 1:21 PM | Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
bryanD[imwit], your wacky 9/11 theories have been blown out of the water countless times before.
Why don't you just ring for the nurse and tell her you're done with the computer for the day so she can escort you back to your room with the rubber wallpaper where you can spend all day explaining the "trooth" to Mr. Shoe and Mr. Sock?
26. Posted by C-C-G | July 1, 2007 1:21 PM |
Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
Posted on July 1, 2007 13:21
27. Posted by C-C-G | July 1, 2007 1:22 PM | Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
I'll donate!
27. Posted by C-C-G | July 1, 2007 1:22 PM |
Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
Posted on July 1, 2007 13:22
28. Posted by jhow66 | July 1, 2007 1:42 PM | Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
I see they left the gate open again and let the Area 51 guy out again.
28. Posted by jhow66 | July 1, 2007 1:42 PM |
Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
Posted on July 1, 2007 13:42
29. Posted by xray | July 1, 2007 1:43 PM | Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
Semanticleo the coward would just sit there and watch innocent children die hoping the terrorist would kill him last. What a little despicable wormtongue you must be. Like most liberals, you do nothing to help strengthen society, you only take until the body of society is dead, then you look for the next body to suckle from. There very well may be a time we remove you from the body before you manage to kill it.
29. Posted by xray | July 1, 2007 1:43 PM |
Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
Posted on July 1, 2007 13:43
30. Posted by Rob LA Ca. | July 1, 2007 2:03 PM | Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
Wingnuts? The only people that are nuts are on the left. The same criminal incompetants that created the LOL "the vast right wing conspiracy" LOL in attempts to explain away one BJ Clinton's sexual crimes against woman. There once was a time when theives and criminals where proud of their profession, new the rules of the game and when caught showed a little dignity. Today those shysters hucksters and criminal frauds make their home in the democrat party and when caught they are kicking and screaming like stuck pigs.
Todays liberal public schools are complete failures for the simple reason , to breed democrats. To indocrinate generations of delinquents ,those like Ted Kennedy who will cheat on tests, drive drunk and kill a passenger then cry like they are the victim. We can already see a new generation of imbeciles doing the distorting , distracting and deceiving for their criminal masters.
Soon these deviant delusional democrats and their school of indocrination will be indistinguishable from the Madrasas in the Middle East. Their religions of hate and intollerance are identicle , neither can win with their ideas with rational people so they must brainwash indoctrinate and create a climate of hate , anger and chaos.
These dastardly cowards who infest the democrat party are worse that the terrorists in my mind because they have no guts. The democrats treasonous words kill Americans and the innocent.
"To be brief, your words are killing us."
"The following letter was written by Lt. Jason Nichols, a Naval officer who is currently serving in Baghdad. He is also the head of Appeal for Courage, a group of American active duty and reserve service personnel who are appealing to Congress to stay and finish the war."
"Senator Reid:
When you say we've lost in Iraq, I don't think you understand the effect of your words. The Iraqis I speak with are the good guys here, fighting to build a stable government. They hear what you say, but they don't understand it. They don't know about the political game, they don't know about a Presidential veto, and they don't know about party politics.
But they do know that if they help us, they are noticed by terrorists and extremists. They decide to help us if they think we can protect them from those terrorists. They tell us where caches of weapons are hidden. They call and report small groups of men who are strangers to the neighborhood, men that look the same to us, but are obvious to them as a foreign suicide cell.
To be brief, your words are killing us. Your statements make the Iraqis afraid to help us for fear we'll leave them unprotected in the future. They don't report a cache, and its weapons blow up my friends in a convoy. They don't report a foreign fighter, and that fighter sends a mortar onto my base. Your statements are noticed, and they have an effect.
Finally, you are mistaken when you say we are losing. We are winning, I see it every day. However, we will win with fewer casualties if you help us. Will you?"
Respectfully,
LT Jason Nichols, USN
MNF-I, Baghdad
"To be brief, your words are killing us."
"To be brief, your words are killing us."
"To be brief, your words are killing us."
"To be brief, your words are killing us."
30. Posted by Rob LA Ca. | July 1, 2007 2:03 PM |
Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
Posted on July 1, 2007 14:03
31. Posted by Rob LA Ca. | July 1, 2007 2:29 PM | Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
"To be brief, your words are killing us."
http://www.americans-working-together.com/id223.html
For all you democrat clowns who claim to "Support the Troops"
31. Posted by Rob LA Ca. | July 1, 2007 2:29 PM |
Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
Posted on July 1, 2007 14:29
32. Posted by C-C-G | July 1, 2007 3:26 PM | Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
Rob: most lefties don't care. They follow Mr. Clinton's lead and "loathe the military." Even some of those who have served still loathe it.
32. Posted by C-C-G | July 1, 2007 3:26 PM |
Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
Posted on July 1, 2007 15:26
33. Posted by Rob LA Ca. | July 1, 2007 4:46 PM | Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
Your absolutely right C-C-G, the rat basturds.
Did ya see the picture of one of our finest having to pose with the Beast Rodham Clinton, of to the side you can clearly see he had his fingers crossed. LOL, doesn't get any better than that.
33. Posted by Rob LA Ca. | July 1, 2007 4:46 PM |
Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
Posted on July 1, 2007 16:46
34. Posted by kim | July 2, 2007 12:53 AM | Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
Well, Semanticleo, you didn't manage to do much here today except be ignorant about MAD. Their missiles weren't good enough, huh, and that's why they caved?
You are also a complete ass to claim Muslims are incompetent.
I've seen you be pretty good. Having an off day? Are you resting? Here, let me turn down the light, for you.
===========================================
34. Posted by kim | July 2, 2007 12:53 AM |
Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
Posted on July 2, 2007 00:53
35. Posted by Roddo | July 2, 2007 3:16 AM | Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
I don't have any experience in making car bombs, nor have I made a study of car bomb history, but if I wanted to inflict maximum damage with a car bomb, I wouldn't use a big and very solid Mercedes. I'd buy a cheap van like the ones you sees all over London and pack the back of it full of explosives and nails. Its thin walls would quickly crumple and all the force of the explosion would hit whoever or whatever it is I want to damage. This makes me wonder if (a) the terrorists are even more incompetent than seems the case or (b) it was intended not to explode by whoever set it up. Someone may be able to explain why a Mercedes makes a fabulous car bomb. If so please post. Rodney
35. Posted by Roddo | July 2, 2007 3:16 AM |
Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
Posted on July 2, 2007 03:16
36. Posted by kim | July 2, 2007 11:30 AM | Score: 0 (0 votes cast)
I suspect a stronger container might only intensify the resulting blast, but even more, I suspect