Oh dear: MI5 analysts admit link between Iraq war and bombings

[ALM]

OK the U.S position has overall favoured Israel whether that be right or wrong. But to say in the most outrageous way I don't accept as reasonable. There have been many examples where the U.S has publically criticised Israeli policy.

No offence but I think you really need to look beneath the surface and get you your facts straight. There may well be some examples where, to use your words, 'the U.S has publicly criticised Israeli policy'. To be honest this amounts to didley squat in real terms. For example, it may be news to you that the US has vetoed virtually every single UN resolution aimed at reigning in Israeli oppression. See the following for a taster:http://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/.../usvetoes.html
In doing so they have effectively prevented the rest of the world acting against this injustice. In addition to maintaining this policy of vetoing, they have armed the Israelis with the very F-16 jets, apache helicopters and massive arsenals of other military hardware used during the periodic incursions into Palestinian refugee camps. Therefore, I think that any reasonable person would have to concede that US policy IS outrageously biased towards the Israelis and this is without a doubt a contributing factor to Islamic fundamentalism. To suggest otherwise is tantamount to ignoring reality and burying your head in the sand.

[BobTheCrate]

No offence taken ALM.

I was aware of the US vetos used, and I was aware the US provides Israel with much of her armoury.

If the US did not provide Israel with the means to defend herself, Egypt and Syria would have driven the Israelis into the sea decades ago.

The world is full of injustice but it is not constructive to lay it all at the feet of the US. I agree though the US could have done more to temper some of the Israeli policies over the years.

The original PLO, and latterly other terrorist groups such as Hamas make distinct impressions on the west when they attack Israeli civilian targets.

But you don't hear them say, "this is for Iraq, this was for the US troops in Saudi".

The terrorism comitted by the Islamic fundamentalists IMO is born out of the old goat himself, Ayatollah. His brand of Islamic extremism came well after the Israel Palestine issue and rarely made any significant reference to it. At its inception, much more concerned with destroying the secular infidels of Muslim Iraq than it was Israel.

I repeat. You seem to make no allowance for the distinct possibility that the Islamic fundamentalists are making excuses for their ultimate desire to destroy the unbelieving infidels.

They couldn't give a rat's arse for Palestinians. Any more than they could for Muslim Bosnians, African Sudanese or African Ethiopians. Anyone who doesn't share and embrace their ideology.

[ALM]

The world is full of injustice but it is not constructive to lay it all at the feet of the US. I agree though the US could have done more to temper some of the Israeli policies over the years.

I agree with you. However, if our aim is to safeguard our peace and prosperity in the UK perhaps it would be prudent for us to distance ourselves from US foreign policy in the Middle East. Whether or not we agree or disagree with the policy itself there seems to be little doubt it has created resentment in the minds of the Arabs.

I repeat. You seem to make no allowance for the distinct possibility that the Islamic fundamentalists are making excuses for their ultimate desire to destroy the unbelieving infidels

I do not believe that this is the motivation behind the bombings in London or the daily attacks against US troops Iraq. I think the truth is something far less sinister. Muslims in the Middle East have little or no history of attacking us on our home soil. Why should they all of a sudden adopt of a policy of 'destroying the infidels' for the heck of it? I believe this is a driect response to our involvement in the war in Iraq and MI5 intelligence confirms this.

They couldn't give a rat's arse for Palestinians. Any more than they could for Muslim Bosnians, African Sudanese or African Ethiopians.

Believe it or not thousands of foreign fighters DID travel to Bosnia to fight their 'jihad' against the Serbs. Have a read of this:http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/europe/1574796.stm

[Not So Wise]

If the US did not provide Israel with the means to defend herself, Egypt and Syria would have driven the Israelis into the sea decades ago.

Nothing against the Israelis but this probably would be a good thing for the world as a whole, people have been predicting the middle east as the source for the next world war since the last one for good reasons and main reason is Israel.

The world is full of injustice but it is not constructive to lay it all at the feet of the US. I agree though the US could have done more to temper some of the Israeli policies over the years.

I blame the whole of the west, if it had been a arab country doing all the things Isreal has done over the years they (countrys individually) would have cut or seriously limited diplomatic ties, it would have been sactioned to hell and back by now, maybe even invaded...err mean liberated, once or twice.

Problem is the west views the Israelis as westerners and the arabs as "ragheads" so it natually sides with the Israelis and does not give a damn about the arab's unless there is potencial for oil prices being affected.

The original PLO, and latterly other terrorist groups such as Hamas make distinct impressions on the west when they attack Israeli civilian targets.

While until recently the west just turned a blind eye when the Israeli troops did the same thing, as if there really is a difference between a suicide bomber targeting innocent men,women and children or if official military troops do it

Actually thinking about it is worse when military troops do it, at least bombers can be ruled out as a "few raving lunitics", whats a whole countrys excuse when they allow their military to get away with the same thing?

[DodgyAgent]

No offence but I think you really need to look beneath the surface and get you your facts straight. There may well be some examples where, to use your words, 'the U.S has publicly criticised Israeli policy'. To be honest this amounts to didley squat in real terms. For example, it may be news to you that the US has vetoed virtually every single UN resolution aimed at reigning in Israeli oppression. See the following for a taster:http://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/.../usvetoes.html
In doing so they have effectively prevented the rest of the world acting against this injustice. In addition to maintaining this policy of vetoing, they have armed the Israelis with the very F-16 jets, apache helicopters and massive arsenals of other military hardware used during the periodic incursions into Palestinian refugee camps. Therefore, I think that any reasonable person would have to concede that US policy IS outrageously biased towards the Israelis and this is without a doubt a contributing factor to Islamic fundamentalism. To suggest otherwise is tantamount to ignoring reality and burying your head in the sand.

ALM, I am surprised that you apply the same rules to Palestine as to those that you apply to Israel. You dont seem to be able (or willing) to understand that on the one hand the US is dealing with a govt that is entirely elected and answerable-and therefore responsible - to its electorate, and on the other hand with a country that has no popular representative.
Palestine is run by a mixture of different groups none of which holds any representation whatsoever. Therefore if the US was to treat Palestinians as equal to Israelis (whatever that means) they would not be able to agree anything to which the Palestinians could guarantee.

The fact that Muslims have not physically invaded another country is irrelevant. What you seem to dismiss so lightly is that these terrorists have no popular mandate, their actions bear little relation to the teachings of Islam (which are fundamentally the same as Christianity). You fail to understand that they have no agenda of their own other than the total destruction of Western style democracies wherever they may be.

You can do whatever you like.. from putting Saddam back into power to apologising for the crusades, but what these people want is for us to put towels over our women (not a bad idea having looked at a few on the station this morning), spend 20 hours a day praying, and throwing away the things that we enjoy doing on a day to day basis (including "discussing topics" on this board.

These people are driven by the desire to control others. They are driven by the hideous thought that women may want to adopt the freedoms of their western counterparts (sex is the prime driver of human behaviour- I would go so far as to say that these terrorists are entirely driven by their own sexual inadequacy... AtW will be next - )

They see the West not as a threat in terms of being an invading force, but as a threat that will dismantle the religious doctrines that are used to suppress Arab (not muslim) women.

The dishonest application of moral equivalence between Israel and Palestine is really a liberal guilt thing, nothing more. We should be proud of what has happened in Israel, a country that has come through a siege of aggression from all of its neighbours to become a cohesive, wealthy (which is why our cowardly self loathing liberals hate them so much) nation, whilst at the same time maintaining its strong religious culture, that gives it the National pride and strength to stand up to its bullying neighbours.

The reason why the US supports Israel is because it wants all other countries to adopt its democratic model. If Israel is destroyed and power shifts to unelected religious extremists then (as has been proved) arab countries will be capable of spreading mayhem without invading other countries.

[The Lone Gunman]

their actions bear little relation to the teachings of Islam.

You say this and go on with the following which a half decent precis of Islam!

You fail to understand that they have no agenda of their own other than the total destruction of Western style democracies wherever they may be.

What these people want is for us to put towels over our women (not a bad idea having looked at a few on the station this morning), spend 20 hours a day praying, and throwing away the things that we enjoy doing on a day to day basis (including "discussing topics" on this board.

These people are driven by the desire to control others. They are driven by the hideous thought that women may want to adopt the freedoms of their western counterparts (sex is the prime driver of human behaviour- I would go so far as to say that these terrorists are entirely driven by their own sexual inadequacy... AtW will be next - )

They see the West not as a threat in terms of being an invading force, but as a threat that will dismantle the religious doctrines that are used to suppress Arab (not muslim) women.

[ALM]

DA,
I guess we'll have to agree to disagree. Our opinion are obviously at the opposite ends of the spectrum. It's Friday afternoon and probably a little late to solve the Arab-Israeli conflict this week anyway.

[Not So Wise]

*long massive bigoted speel about how everyone in Islam wants to impose their way on everyone else*

The reason why the US supports Israel is because it wants all other countries to adopt its democratic model.

Don't you see irony there? You accuse them of what you say "we" (the west) want to do ourselves (and it's true west and especially the US want to do that)

West wants to force it's values on them, they want to force theirs on us, but because our values are ours we are goodguys, theirs are not ours so they are the badguys.

[DodgyAgent]

Don't you see irony there? You accuse them of what you say "we" (the west) want to do ourselves (and it's true west and especially the US want to do that)

West wants to force it's values on them, they want to force theirs on us, but because our values are ours we are goodguys, theirs are not ours so they are the badguys.

I agree with you not so wise. I am indeed advocating the spread of western style democracy. I do however regard democracy as a force for good (until the socialists hijack it) because it exists through popular consent. Democracy is also a positive force. Dictatorships on the other hand can no longer be confined to within National borders (except in Africa.. for now), and they without doubt offer a negative threat to the outside world (sponsoring of terrorism.. the provision of training facilities etc etc.).

However I also understand that to impose democracies upon countries is likely to have a negative effect. This democratic imperialism -to call it that- can only work if it becomes popular with sufficient numbers of people from sovereign states.

We are no longer in a position to cover our heads and ignore what is happening elsewhere. By doing nothing we are a threat to non democratic countries. How do you think the people of North Korea would feel if they were able to turn on the TV and see what happens in the rest of the world? How do you think Iranian mullahs feel when their TV screens are full of semi naked totty cavorting around an Egyptian holiday resort? the answer is that our very existence is undermining their power. This is why they are so keen to support groups who wish to undermine "western decadence".

Most businesses work well when both workers and managers cooperate and work towards the same goals. This can only be achieved if those goals help all parties to achieve their ambitions rather than a few. The same rules apply to people and their rulers, and relationships between different countries.

The Armageddon that is talked about in Revelations is not that far away, and yes it will be a conflict between the West and the East. The difference is that the West cannot use force to impose its will because its own people will not sanction it.. we are even having difficulty approving the removal of an evil bastard like Saddam by force.. It is the outcome of democracy vs terrorism that will determine the future.

[SupremeSpod]

I agree with you not so wise. I am indeed advocating the spread of western style democracy. I do however regard democracy as a force for good (until the socialists hijack it) because it exists through popular consent. Democracy is also a positive force. Dictatorships on the other hand can no longer be confined to within National borders (except in Africa.. for now), and they without doubt offer a negative threat to the outside world (sponsoring of terrorism.. the provision of training facilities etc etc.).

However I also understand that to impose democracies upon countries is likely to have a negative effect. This democratic imperialism -to call it that- can only work if it becomes popular with sufficient numbers of people from sovereign states.

We are no longer in a position to cover our heads and ignore what is happening elsewhere. By doing nothing we are a threat to non democratic countries. How do you think the people of North Korea would feel if they were able to turn on the TV and see what happens in the rest of the world? How do you think Iranian mullahs feel when their TV screens are full of semi naked totty cavorting around an Egyptian holiday resort? the answer is that our very existence is undermining their power. This is why they are so keen to support groups who wish to undermine "western decadence".

Most businesses work well when both workers and managers cooperate and work towards the same goals. This can only be achieved if those goals help all parties to achieve their ambitions rather than a few. The same rules apply to people and their rulers, and relationships between different countries.

The Armageddon that is talked about in Revelations is not that far away, and yes it will be a conflict between the West and the East. The difference is that the West cannot use force to impose its will because its own people will not sanction it.. we are even having difficulty approving the removal of an evil bastard like Saddam by force.. It is the outcome of democracy vs terrorism that will determine the future.

There is no such thing as democracy.