Yes
10% (2 votes)
Yes
10% (2 votes)
No
40% (8 votes)
No
40% (8 votes)
Total votes: 20
Would London have been bombed if Britain been against the invasion of Iraq?
Published by You on 19 July, 2005 - 00:50
User login
Author Information
Poll
Why have you visited this website?
To check for updates
11%
Read posts
39%
Contribute to discussions
6%
Share content
3%
Social media brought me here
6%
Tis fate
35%
Total votes: 633
Active forum topics
Recent blog posts
Upcoming Events
- 30 Nov 2024 - 11:30 to 16:30
- 30 Nov 2024 - 11:30 to 16:30
- 7 Dec 2024 - 11:30 to 17:00
- 8 Dec 2024 - 11:30 to 16:30
- 15 Dec 2024 - 11:00 to 16:00
Who's online
There are currently 0 users online.
Salaam
Simple question.
No need to guess who committed the attrocities. Leave that to the other topic.
Now:
If the explosions were carried out by muslims, would they still have been carried out had Britain acted to avoid the terrorist invasion of Iraq?
My view: No they would not have happened. The invasion of Iraq legitimised Britain as a target.
"For too long, we have been a passively tolerant society, saying to our citizens 'as long as you obey the law, we will leave you alone'" - David Cameron, UK Prime Minister. 13 May 2015.
deleted
your right sis Britain has always been attacking or helping in attacking other Muslim countries...this has been the case for a long time but i still think that if Britain didnt join forces with the US against Iraq then London would not have been attacked...until the Iraq invasion i think Britain was relatively safe
London has long been considered as a 'hub' and 'safe-haven' for Muslim extremists. I mean, look at Abu Qatada and Omar Bakri, they live/ed off the social. If this had been any other country they would have been deported or locked-up a long time before Sep 11.
London had not been bombed before because some of these extremists didn't want to compromise the relatively easy treatment they got from the gov. But now that Britain is so far up the American [i]agenda[/i], attacking Britain is as good as getting America. Britain is almost the 51st state.
Britain has been on the target list for ages esp after sep 11
i think Iraq was just the icing on the cake
salaam
over a million people in UK marched against Iraq war, most were non Muslims. MOST People here totally disagree with the war but they dont blow buses up! Come on people get a grip! Yes Iraq war was illegal...etc et cetc but NO reason for a terrorist attck on civilans in LONDON. Terrorists dont need reasons.....
i am angry about Iraq, Palestine, Chechnya, Kashmir........ but i wouldnt even think of carrying out a terrorist attack here...why????? its haram, its a path to hell, it kills MUSLIMS and non muslims, it doesnt achieve abything, it makes things worse for Muslims here, more laws are enforced which makes things harder for us......
its crazy!!!!!!
so we shouldnt really make excuses..it should be condemned . full stop! by saying the attacks occured because of this, and this....its giving terrorists credibility!
wasalaam
After Sep 11 many countries backed the US in Afghanistan.
But heck, that didn't stop bin Laden from offering Europe a truce.
Britain could have survived if it only backed the invasion of Afghanistan, but in invading Iraq it went too far. It stood alone with the US against almost the rest of the world.
France and Germany aren't seen as targets even though they backed the invasion of Afghanistan.
I agree that stupid terrorists dont really need a reason
cos like Mr Ed said-if anything their actions just makes life difficult for others and acheives nothing
We marched. But I didn't see any terrorists marching.
Heck, HTs came up to me at a march in Birmingham telling me not to march because some of the marchers were gays and socialists!
Ofcourse we should condemn. By looking at reasons we are not condoning or justifying.
We should look at reasons and causes so that such attackes can be avoided in the future.
To say terrorists don't need reasons is naive. They are obviously driven by something.
People who kill for the sake of killing are serial killers. They are dealt with through the legal process.
Terrorists kill for political goals. They are dealt with by war.
if we're looking at reasons-
to me the main reason is parents not keeping an eye on that their kids do/who they meet up with
and extreme demented teachers-who play on people's frustrations and anger
when we look at reasons we are saying "they did it COS of that-which makes it OK"
this is a wrong approach
but its OK to say "I see where they're coming from"
but I don't think it was cos of Iraq
Frustrations and anger are reasons. It's how you channel such emotions is what matters.
By looking at reasons we do not say '... so it's OK'.
Criminal psycologists look at reasons that drive criminals. Criminal psycologists do not condone crime.
Historains look at reasons for events such as mass murder and genocide. Historains do not condone mass murder or genocide.
Many Muslims are frustrated and angry-their emotions are justified
and the reason for their anger is justified
but not every frstrated and angry youth goes and blows buses up
actions are NEVER justified-nor is any reason or excuse for such actions ever valid
Like I said, it's the way that you channel anger and frustration is what matters.
If you are aware of the democratic process and its effectiveness then you channel your anger and frustration by working within the democratic process.
If you are not aware of the democratic process and/or see it as 'Kuffar', then you have very few avenues through which you can channel your anger and frustration. Soon enough your emotions overcome you and/or are exploited by dangerous people.
so u agree that the reason dont lie in Iraq war
but lies in demented guys who brainwash frustrated angry youth
deleted
Yeah ur right-they weren’t demented or brainwashed they were incredibly intellignt and wise
Only clever Muslims go round blowing up buses so that our mums are sworn at in the streets as a result :roll:
The demented brainwashers would not have used frustrated youth to attack Britain before the Iraq war because the demented brainwashers had it easy in London.
But the Iraq war pushed the demented brainwashers over the edge and made them want to attack Britain using frustrated youth.
The frustrated youth would have been even more frustrated because of the Iraq war.
Comeon Ed get a grip.
Why emphasise Muslim deaths over others? you are dividing, and allowing us to be conquered.
Britain was seen as safe before the invasion of Iraq. Not thinking there would have been retaliation over Iraq was naive and incredulous.
Whilst britain may have poked around other areas you must remember it also had some goodwill especially over kosovo. All that disappeared. Muslims felt betrayed.
Now are you saying the Iraq war never made it any easier for Alqaeda to find recruits?
"For too long, we have been a passively tolerant society, saying to our citizens 'as long as you obey the law, we will leave you alone'" - David Cameron, UK Prime Minister. 13 May 2015.
Most Britons Say Blasts Linked to Iraq War: Poll
LONDON, July 19, 2005 (IslamOnline.net & News Agencies) - Two-thirds of Britons believe the July 7 bombings in London were linked to Prime Minister Tony Blair's support for the US-led invasion of Iraq, according to a poll published late Tuesday, July 19.
The ICM survey for the Guardian newspaper found 33 percent of Britons believe Blair bears “a lot” of responsibility for the attacks, whose death toll rose Tuesday to 56, and a further 31 percent believe he bears “a little" responsibility.
Only 28 percent of those polled said Iraq and the London bombings were not connected.
http://islam-online.net/English/News/2005-07/19/article01.shtml
of course the attacks r linked to iraq!!
yashmaki u talking cobblers again!
tony blair aint gonna admit dat his decision to kiss george bush ass is the reason why we were attacked...since when did politicans admit they mistakes?
blair was a coward to back bush...he told us a pack of lies to sell dis war, and now we facing da backlash...
he supposed to be a LABOUR pm!
when usa went to war wiv vietman, our LABOUR PM, harold wilson i think it was, told dem to chip...blair should have don da same...
BUT...whos killing who in iraq?
far as i can tell, its the "resistance" who r killing they muslim "brothers" in iraq for daring to apply for a job and put some food on da table for family...
wheres da condemnation of al-Zawahri and his mob of butchers?
POWER TO THE PEOPLE
[b]BLAIR HAS FATAL FLAW IN BELIEF ON THE WAR
22 July 2005
DAILY MIRROR[/b]
TONY Blair moved swiftly yesterday to reassert his authority in the wake of London's second terror attack in two weeks.
He had no choice. His new standing as a leader of national unity was coming apart at the seams.
Just when it had become possible to be optimistic after the terrible events of 7/7, the Prime Minister blew it.
Advertisement
For ten days he stood at the head of a remarkable coalition of support across the country, across the political spectrum, and across the racial, social and religious divides.
And then he picked a needless argument, not just with his own security services, but with the British people - claiming that the London bombings have nothing to do with Iraq.
This attitude is so manifestly absurd that it was immediately repudiated by two thirds of voters in an opinion poll.
The Joint Terrorist Analysis Centre also gave the lie, reporting: "Events in Iraq are continuing to act as a motivation and a focus of a range of terrorist-related activity in the UK."
These are Blair's own spooks, whose findings presumably go across his desk in Number Ten.
For good measure, the respected Royal Institute of International Affairs said that Iraq "posed particular difficulties for the UK and for the wider coalition against terrorism." And "riding pillion passenger" to George Dubya Bush put the UK in greater danger from al-Qaeda.
Yesterday, at his Downing Street media briefing, Blair was nervous about the Iraq link. His eyes flickered into a far corner when a questioner asked: "Do you feel responsible? The people of London are now in the front line."
He hates this linkage, because it focuses public attention on the Achilles' heel of his foreign policy.
Nobody, certainly not me, says that the war in Iraq is the sole, direct and immediate cause of 7/7. It wasn't. Nor is it any form of justification.
But it is pointless to pretend that this conflict has not helped to create a climate in which it is easier for hard-line Muslim clerics to corrupt young minds and for terrorist godfathers to recruit suicide bombers.
There is a fatal flaw in Tony Blair's makeup that shows when his personal feelings become inextricably bound up with national strategy. It is his naive, all-consuming self-belief.
If you don't believe me, listen to Lord Roy Hattersley, the former deputy Labour leader, who argues: "The ultimate justification for the war in Iraq - when it was no longer possible to pretend that weapons of mass destruction were only 45 minutes away - was that Blair's conscience allowed no other course of action.
"The notion of accepting a view other than his own has never entered his head."
We are back in the same crazy place, and Blair's flaw will prove fatal to the spirit of national unity that has built up among the public and at Westminster since July 7.
i got some sympathy with blair...but only a little
hes really aged in da last year or so...and hes got a tough job.. .
BUT...
hes made his bed...now he gotta lay (or should that be LIE) in it...
it was his judgement call...
he send our boys into iraq cos he though our best interests lay in sticking with da big boys, usa...
hes gotta take the responsibility...
blood on his hands...
in my view, he a coward...
hes brought dis upon us...its HIS fault....
if he had any decency, or honesty, he’s resign...
i aint holdin my breath...
POWER TO THE PEOPLE
Muslim scholars outside and especially inside iraq have condemned the targeting of civillians there.
I think you mean Zarqawi.
al-Zawahri is al-qaeda's real leader and he's probably in pakistan.
Do we need to condemn individually every single murder that is committed?
I am against issuing any releases only condemning any attack, as it should not be needed. Nor expected. Otherwise, we would have a few 'The Revival Condmns...' every day.
On second thoughs, thats easy. It will get us some content every day! (being sarcastic)
"For too long, we have been a passively tolerant society, saying to our citizens 'as long as you obey the law, we will leave you alone'" - David Cameron, UK Prime Minister. 13 May 2015.
waht u gonna lose if u do?
of course u dont... nobody asking u too....:roll:
i accept da blame for da iraq mess lies wiv son of bush and his poodle blair...
but it shuld also be remembered dat most of the killing currently going on is by da terrorists against their fellow muslim iraqis...its an important point..dats all i was chattin about...
POWER TO THE PEOPLE