This is annoying: multiple bomb blasts in London

[slamlander]

At least three busses were blown and more than six explosions occured in the London UndergroundAt first I thought they were going to blame it on a power problem. I am glad that they didn't. Bombs are probably less traumatic than an admission that there were engineering failures. However, Londoners are used to bombs. At least, they understand them.

Comments

Terror

[framstag]

To be honest: I 'knew' something like this would happen sometime.

And yes: I hate this kind of terror, too. Innocent people (especially kids) can't be the target of any assault. The leaders of the al-Qaida argue (I read it somewhere), that the children are the future enemies and supporter of the enemy country. This is absolutely bullshit.

Re: Terror

[slamlander]

Actually, that's a part of a Total War doctrine that they hope the rest of the world doesn't adopt against them. You can use that to justify any atrocity, including genocide of all Palestinians.

Al-Qaida has declared a Total War against the West. The reason that they aren't looking towards the East(Asia) is because the Asian leaders understand Total War intimately (Pol Pot, Ho Chi Minh, Kim Jung Il, etc). In comparision, the West has gotten soft. The last real Total War leaders, that the West has seen, were Hitler and Patton, neither of which survived WWII.

If the Islamic clergy doesn't work really hard and continuously to separate themselves, and Islam, from groups like Hamas, Hazballah, and al-Qaida, then we may yet see a Total War declared against Islam. This is what Bin Laden wants.

[real_skeptic]

Hmm... genocide of all Palestinians? I hope you haven't heard that as a real ideology of any actual group. I think even the most extreme groups here don't advocate it. They are talking about transfer.

Re: Terror

[wisedonkey]

So you're telling me bin Laden wants Islam destroyed?

[devampirelestat]

Innocents are ALWAYS an open target in war. If every battle was only fought between experienced soldiers, the anger and outrage would be minimal. We would all know what we were doing and no one could claim ignorance as to the consequences.

For whatever reasons that wars begin and continue, usually included in that group listed is a sense of injustice and outrage over atrocities committed by another party. We devistate civilian populations on their side and call it payback for those lives taken from our side.

It never changes and never will. Such is the nature of battle. In the end, we are all the losers, even the innocents.

-Elle

But the problem here is that

[slamlander]

al-Qaida isn't a country. They are a bunch of bandits and bullies. It isn't a war. At least, the IRA considered themselves a legitimate army of a legitimate government. Al-Qaida acknowleges no government and speaks for none. Their aim is to bring down our civilization, period. That is not war, that is vandalism.

I can't agree with either of you completely.

[real_skeptic]

First, about the reason for wars, it normally starts not because of a sense of atrocity but with an argument about land, water rights, ownership, god's will and so on. The atrocities usually follow that.

But as for Al-Qaeda, although they do not represent a government, in their minds they represend Allah. I'm not even sure it's a novel idea - we just got used to the national state in the past couple of centuries. How about the crusades? It's not about national boundaries, but about forcing an ideology and a way of life on others.

Re: But the problem here is that

[devampirelestat]

True....but even vandals don't care who they hurt or what they destroy.

-Elle

[gabbysmom]

Annoying...well that's one way to put it.