Egypt, where art thou?

[Please visit our sponsor:]

[Erik]

I pretty much gave up posting here, got tired of the inanity and never-ending anti US comments but a couple of things have led me to want to step in briefly, albeit, very briefly.

First, it's interesting that no one here sends their condolences to the Egyptian people. Let me do so.

I guess, THEY, don't count because you can't really blame that one on the USA, or Israel, can you?

But I don't want to talk about that, or, even enter into the tired old debate. Instead I'll let John Howard words resonate with whom they will. They say a lot.

Question:

To both Prime Ministers, what was your immediate reaction on hearing that some incidents had occurred, was it here we go again? And do incidents like this, coming just 14 days after the horrific attacks, suggest that the war against terror is being lost on the streets? And yesterday an Australian bomb victim of July 7 linked the bombings to Iraq. Does that suggest that the propaganda war against terrorists is also being lost?

Mr Howard:

Could I start by saying the Prime Minister and I were having a discussion when we heard about it, and my first reaction was to get some more information, and I really don't want to add to what the Prime Minister has said. It is a matter for the police and a matter for the British authorities to talk in detail about what has happened here. Could I just say very directly, Paul, on the issue of the policies of my government, and indeed the policies of the British and American government on Iraq, that the first point of reference is that once a country allows its foreign policy to be determined by terrorism, it has given the game away, to use the vernacular. And no Australian government that I lead will ever have policies determined by terrorism or terrorist threats, and no self-respecting government of any political stripe in Australia would allow that to happen.

Can I remind you that the murder of 88 Australians in Bali took place before the operation in Iraq; and could I remind you that the 11 September occurred before the operation in Iraq; can I also remind you that the very first occasion that Bin Laden specifically referred to Australia was in the context of Australia's involvement in liberating the people of East Timor.

Are people, by implication, suggesting that we shouldn't have done that? When a group claimed responsibility on the website for the attacks on 7 July, they talked about British policy, not just in Iraq, but in Afghanistan. Are people suggesting we shouldn't be in Afghanistan?

When Sergio de Melo was murdered in Iraq, a brave man, a distinguished international diplomat, immensely respected for his work in the United Nations, when al Queda gloated about that they referred specifically to the role that de Melo had carried out in East Timor because he was the United Nations administrator in East Timor. Now I don't know the mind of the terrorist, by definition you can't put yourself in the mind of a successful suicide bomber, I can only look at objective facts, and the objective facts are as I have cited. The objective evidence is that Australia was a terrorist target long before the operation in Iraq, and indeed all the evidence, as distinct from the suppositions, suggest to me that this is about hatred of a way of life, this is about the perverted use of the principles of a great world religion that at its root preaches peace and cooperation, and I think we lose sight of the challenge we have if we allow ourselves to see these attacks in the context of particular circumstances, rather than the abuse through a perverted ideology of people and their murder.

Prime Minister:

I agree 100% with that.

http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/common/story_page/0,5744,16011576%255E28737,00.html

[Neil Mick]

I pretty much gave up posting here, got tired of the inanity and never-ending anti US comments but a couple of things have led me to want to step in briefly, albeit, very briefly.

OMG, as I live and breathe: Erik returneth, into the bosom of the aikiweb forums. Welcome. ;)

"Anti-US comments?" Please. You lost the debate, about the possible wmd's in Iraq. But, I don't hold it against you, at all.

As you might recall, so long ago: our major sticking point was the testimony of Kamal Hussein, which neither of us knew at the time had his full testimony partially censored. In fact, he stated that the wmd's were all destroyed.

It could well have gone the other way, tho. I could well be sitting here, ruefully acknowledging that I was wrong, as the wmd stockpiles were uncovered. And, I take no pleasure in being right: 100,000 deaths is bitter fruit, over which to celebrate any sort of victory.

But please: don't you feel a little cheated, now that we all know the perfidy of the President's lies? Casting broad-net aspersions on ppl who disagree with you is so not your style, after all.

First, it's interesting that no one here sends their condolences to the Egyptian people. Let me do so.

Yes, you're so right. Condolences to all who lost their lives at the resort bombings.

I guess, THEY, don't count because you can't really blame that one on the USA, or Israel, can you?

Um, no, actually. Just as the Bali bombings are not often mentioned, or the July 6th Haiti massacre wouldn't have been mentioned unless I posted a thread: I think it's more about the nationality of the victims, rather than whom to blame.

If NYC were bombed again: you'd better believe that someone here would mention it, no matter whom was to blame.

this is about hatred of a way of life, this is about the perverted use of the principles of a great world religion that at its root preaches peace and cooperation, and I think we lose sight of the challenge we have if we allow ourselves to see these attacks in the context of particular circumstances, rather than the abuse through a perverted ideology of people and their murder.

Lalala. Oh yes: they "hate us, because they hate freedom;" or "their reasons for doing this is solely based on their perverted ideology."

Uh huh. Maybe that is true, in part. Certainly, anyone who targets civilians (as we did in dropping cluster bombs in Baghdad) likely DOES have a distorted sense of values.

But, doncha think that OUR actions in the MidEast might have a teensy, weensy bit to do with it? Consider this:

Chatham House Report (http://www.chathamhouse.org.uk/index.php?id=189&pid=247)

The report claims that there is ‘no doubt’ that the invasion of Iraq has imposed particular difficulties for the UK and for the wider coalition against terrorism. According to the paper, the situation in Iraq has ‘given a boost to the Al-Qaeda network’s propaganda, recruitment and fundraising’, whilst providing an ideal targeting and training area for Al-Qaeda-linked terrorists.

It's not just that they have "perverted values:" we also have to look at what we do to the people of the Middle East. Howard, Blair and Bush all say the same thing, about terrorists. Funny, but after 5 years, they seem farther away from solving the problem, than when they started.

But, nice to hear from you again. In spite of your misgivings, it was a challenge to debate you, back in '03. ;)

[Neil Mick]

And, just for a little perspective:

The Rise of Jihadi Suicide Culture (http://www.alternet.org/story/23693/)


While the attacks on London and Egypt in recent days have dominated the headlines, Iraq appears to be playing a central role -- in shifting views and as ground zero in a new wave in of suicide attacks.

The tactical logic of the suicide bomber hasn't changed: He's difficult to stop, and equalizes the power differential between the militarily weak and the strong. But it appears, say some analysts, to have developed a momentum of its own. As it has become more common among the circles of supporters of the global jihad, taboos have been broken down creating a greater willingness among young men to take their own lives, which in turn feeds the cycle.

The Shiite group Hizbullah, which pioneered modern suicide bombings against Israel during its occupation of Lebanon, used the tactic fewer than 40 times. Palestinian militants, who adopted the tactic from Hizbullah, used suicide attackers 100 times in the 10 years until the end of 2002. Since, there have been 35 suicide attacks. And in Iraq, where suicide terrorism was virtually unknown before the US invasion, there have been 188 suicide bombings since August 2003, according to the Brookings Institute Iraq Index (although some research puts the tally as high as 400.)

That compares to 315 total suicide attacks carried out worldwide between 1980 and 2003, according to data compiled by University of Chicago professor Robert Pape in his book Dying to Win.

Mr. Pape argues in his book that suicide attacks are far from exclusive to Muslims or religious radicals.

He points out that 76 of the attacks in the period he surveyed were carried by Sri Lanka's Tamil Tigers, a secular separatist movement, while others point to the Japanese kamikazes of World War II.

"It's a tactic of desperation, of people who feel they're weak and have to take a stand against what they see as their enemy, so it's not just an act of fanaticism,'' says Wayne White, an adjunct scholar at the Middle East Institute and a retired senior official for the State Department's office of Analysis for the Near East and South Asia.

[Adam Alexander]

I'm all about pro-U.S....citizens and rights that is. You know, property rights such as having my money being sucked away for a war built on lies. You know, freedom to board a train without armed guards watching over me.

You know, you see that second part in a lot of movies...only they're normally saying..."Paypas...Paypas, plees."