War is a two-way street....

[kentuck]

When you give your approval to invade another country and cheer at "shock and awe" and are totally indifferent when tens of thousands of enemies are killed, then you should not be surprised when the "enemy" attacks us in return. That is the nature of war. You kill them and they kill you. It is a sad fact. May we ask, what did you expect??

[nothingshocksmeanymore]

1. Careful Kentuck

speaking the plain truth about the atrocity that violence is will get you tagged as a cynic politicizing the pain of others for political gain

[King Coal]

26. Not to mention telling too much truth.

[IrateCitizen]

2. Even sadder is that a majority of Brits were against the invasion...

... and the opposition to the war in GB has only grown since then.

If anyone should have to pay the price for this, it is Tony Blair. He is the one who ultimately decided to join this ill-founded scheme of world domination.

[ChiDem]

23. Well...

In all fairness, Blair was just re-elected.

Our evil leaders could never wage war based on lies unless we voted them into office.

[IrateCitizen]

27. Actually, Blair's party was just re-elected...

From the way I understand British politics, the PM isn't actually elected -- they're the leader of the party who controls parliament. Since the Conservatives are more war-friendly than New Labour, that meant that British voters didn't have much of a choice.

Of course, I welcome correction from any Brit DUers on this matter if I'm wrong.

[Renew Deal]

3. As usual

you are right on. I still think this is more complicated than that, but not much more.

[still_one]

5. problem is Iraq didn't attack us

al queada did

[still_one]

4. actually your premise is wrong

it is NOT the Iraqiis that are attacking us but al queada

that is what makes this even more tragic, we have invaded a country that had NOTHING to do with 9/11 or al queada

Yes, no one talks about the thousands we have killed with our bombs in Iraq, and lack of progress against terrorism. This is what we should be outraged about

[Frederik]

8. Strictly speaking

it is not known who attacked, at this stage.

[still_one]

24. bbc indicated al queada(sic)

[Frederik]

28. Well, of course

everybody is indicating that based on the nature of the attack, but in the absence of any evidence or intelligence, it's just a guess, albeit an educated one.

[underthedome]

6. If a family member of yours is ever killed by a bomb you mind if I say

"hey, war is a two way street, what did you expect?"

[IrateCitizen]

9. If a family member of mine was hurt, DU is the last place I would be...

Rather, I'd be spending my time in actual human contact, with the other members of my family. To be blunt, I would probably give a shit less what a bunch of people were saying on an anonymous internet discussion board.

[underthedome]

15. great that's super, but you missed my point. nm

nm

[IrateCitizen]

20. No, I got your point just fine...

That point being that if a family member of mine was killed, I really could care less what you or just about anybody else on this board would say, because I don't know you from Adam. My interactions with most people here are strictly through the internet.

As for those who never logged on to DU, I would guess that they REALLY could care less what you or anyone else here might have to say about things.

[kentuck]

11. Innocents are killed in every war...

Do you think any innocents have been killed in Iraq? Who is responsible? They had it coming? What you say is the sad part of war. Someone's family is killed . It could be mine or it could be yours. Let's support Bush and the illegal war.

[GiovanniC]

12. If a Family Member of Yours Was Killed By a Bomb

What would YOU do?

Would you retaliate?

[underthedome]

14. By killing innocent people on a bus? No nm.

nm

[kentuck]

18. Would you ever ask "why" ?

And what would you do if came up with an answer?

[GiovanniC]

19. Well... What WOULD You Do?

I'm curious. Would you sit back and say, "Well, these things happen"?

My post was not to justify the attacks on London, which are not justifiable. However, I am curious as to whether you would sit back or if you would retaliate against a government which killed an innocent loved one.

[Yavin4]

7. Like I Said In Another Post, We're Still Fighting The Gulf War of 1990

All of these terrorist attacks such as both WTC attacks are directly tied to our military intervention from the first Gulf War.

[BurtWorm]

10. And yet...

Al Qaeda is not Iraq. The cause of this attack may not be Iraq ultimately, but the root cause of the 9/11 attack--or root stimulus, if cause is too much of a blame-assigning word. So this is not necessarily retaliation for this particular Bushist war for Iraqi oil, but for the perceived attack of the Western world on the Islamic world.

There is a danger of confusing the minds and hands that created this chaos in London by making the same mistake the right-wing makes in failing to differentiate these particular hands from the ones resisting the occupation in Iraq.

[CWebster]

13. There was some mention, however

that Denmark and Italy received threats for backing Bush's quagmire. The bombing of Madrid was also within the context of Iraq.

[BurtWorm]

22. The "beauty" of Iraq is that it gives the Bushists and al Qaeda

an excuse to keep on bombing the shit out of civilians.

[Jacobin]

16. When you shoot at someone, they'll probably shoot back

Such a simple and obvious statement that seems to confound many on DU who seem to live in a video game land where the little guys on the screen seem to shoot back but you don't actually get blown up.

We are living in a society that is in utter and complete denial of reality.

If you start a fucking war, they will fight back!!

[CWebster]

17. But, but, but

how dare they.

[bigtree]

21. Retribution

often means that we eventually do to ourselves what we have done unto others.

Eric Hoffer (1902–83)

[spindoctor]

25. Our civilians are more valuable than their civilians

And from a sentimental perspective that is definitely true.

Some incoherent thoughts:

At this time it is cold blooded to leave sentiment out of the equation.

Israel kills 3 Palestinians for every Israeli killed. Our ratio is somewhere between 8:1 and 30:1

Too many people see war as an abstract concept. It needs to hit home in order for them to grasp the meaning of war.

No level of 'security' is going to prevent terrorist attacks.

Many European cities (including London) have dealt with terrorism for 30 years or more (IRA/ETA/BMG/RAF/PKU, etc). Why is this different?

I REALLY don't want to say "I told you so".

Peace!