The Americans seem to have killed him. (From Bucks Free Press)

It smacks of hypocrisy when we object to sights of flags being burnt in Iraqi, Afghan or other country's streets, yet we show endless scenes of people chanting 'USA' or dancing in the streets.

This type of coverage, while somewhat understandable given the level of monstrous behaviour he persuaded other people to commit, is only likely to further inflame tensions.

He is dead but there are other fundamentalist groups out there who are going to take this as an excuse for more needless deaths. Lets move past this.

There will always be groups that 'threaten' or challenge our ideals. Are we going to try and wipe them all out?

Situations get out of control and ordinary folk suffer as usual.
.
Politics , religion or tribalism causes this destructiveness - history proves it.
.
Put any 2 of these three things together and there is a constant source of despair, deprivation and death. Anywhere in the world.
.
These ingredients must be kept apart to avoid continual explosive scenarios otherwise malicious people with evil-intent will thrive and flourish.

Very cryptic. You sound like you intend to be vague and open to interpretation.
:
Aren't those three ingredients all one anyway?
:
Security word: 'body-week'... Fitting.

No more than they try to wipe us out..
Or can you justify 9/11 and the July bombings?

But D these are terrorist acts caused by groups rather than acts by any particular government. The lessons of Iraq and Afghanistan show us that we are not going to win 'hearts and minds'. The best we can hope for is that we kill more of theirs than they kill of ours.

Libya demonstrates that even dictators are supported by a sizeable proportion of the population and, even given the chance, they opt not to get rid of them.

At what point do we decide not to be the policemen of the world, and in the process inflame the Middle and Far East? When we have had a generation of young men killed or bankrupted ourselves?

Our best hope is to concentrate on the security and intelligence in our country.

NicM wrote:
But D these are terrorist acts caused by groups rather than acts by any particular government. The lessons of Iraq and Afghanistan show us that we are not going to win 'hearts and minds'. The best we can hope for is that we kill more of theirs than they kill of ours.

Libya demonstrates that even dictators are supported by a sizeable proportion of the population and, even given the chance, they opt not to get rid of them.

At what point do we decide not to be the policemen of the world, and in the process inflame the Middle and Far East? When we have had a generation of young men killed or bankrupted ourselves?

Our best hope is to concentrate on the security and intelligence in our country.

I agree with you to a point Nic BUT perhaps I have a more simplistic view.
If someone attacks us, what the heck are we supposed to do?

I think the so called war on terror is an abomination but at the same time not to do anything is also not an option IMO.

demoness wrote:

NicM wrote:
But D these are terrorist acts caused by groups rather than acts by any particular government. The lessons of Iraq and Afghanistan show us that we are not going to win 'hearts and minds'. The best we can hope for is that we kill more of theirs than they kill of ours.

Libya demonstrates that even dictators are supported by a sizeable proportion of the population and, even given the chance, they opt not to get rid of them.

At what point do we decide not to be the policemen of the world, and in the process inflame the Middle and Far East? When we have had a generation of young men killed or bankrupted ourselves?

Our best hope is to concentrate on the security and intelligence in our country.

I agree with you to a point Nic BUT perhaps I have a more simplistic view.
If someone attacks us, what the heck are we supposed to do?

I think the so called war on terror is an abomination but at the same time not to do anything is also not an option IMO.

But riding into Iraq and Afghanistan like some kind of avenging angels was not the only option. What action got rid of Bin Laden? Wars that have killed hundreds of young men and women? No intelligence and a targeted attack with little risk to the attackers.

We will never win the 'War on Terror' as by pursuing it we will create a terrorist for every one we kill. All of history where terrorist or guerilla activity has taken place from World War II, Israel, Afghanistan (Russia and us), Ireland etc. shows that force does not solve the issue.

Our blind following of the American lead just means that we are targeted with the same brush and 'open game'.

NicM wrote:

demoness wrote:

NicM wrote:
But D these are terrorist acts caused by groups rather than acts by any particular government. The lessons of Iraq and Afghanistan show us that we are not going to win 'hearts and minds'. The best we can hope for is that we kill more of theirs than they kill of ours.

Libya demonstrates that even dictators are supported by a sizeable proportion of the population and, even given the chance, they opt not to get rid of them.

At what point do we decide not to be the policemen of the world, and in the process inflame the Middle and Far East? When we have had a generation of young men killed or bankrupted ourselves?

Our best hope is to concentrate on the security and intelligence in our country.

I agree with you to a point Nic BUT perhaps I have a more simplistic view.
If someone attacks us, what the heck are we supposed to do?

I think the so called war on terror is an abomination but at the same time not to do anything is also not an option IMO.

But riding into Iraq and Afghanistan like some kind of avenging angels was not the only option. What action got rid of Bin Laden? Wars that have killed hundreds of young men and women? No intelligence and a targeted attack with little risk to the attackers.

We will never win the 'War on Terror' as by pursuing it we will create a terrorist for every one we kill. All of history where terrorist or guerilla activity has taken place from World War II, Israel, Afghanistan (Russia and us), Ireland etc. shows that force does not solve the issue.

Our blind following of the American lead just means that we are targeted with the same brush and 'open game'.

Oh you are so right there and I remember at the time people saying that it would be almost impossible to find anyone in Afghanistan because of the terrain of the place.
Have you read " A thousand Setting Suns?". It gives an interesting perception of the war....

No, I haven't. I'll have a look for it on Amazon.

Just follow the money...
.
Who funds al-qaeda? Where do they get their money from? Selling us oil.
.
Where does Gaddafi get his guns, bullets, shells etc from? They dont make them themselves. Where does he get the money to pay for them? Selling us oil.
.
There's a lot of very easy money to be made out of conflict. I don't think we question it nearly enough.

Nic: a sound perspective. Policemen of the world, just that.
:
And something is niggling in the back of my mind.
:
Is the fact that he was last living in Pakistan significant?
:
I mean, quietly and almost imperceptibly, Britain seems to be making suspects of many nations who are not like us.
:
Iraq, Afghanistan, Pakistan, Libya... do they have anything in common with eachother?
:
I'm afraid the US and UK masses will group these nations together and just begin to suspect anyone dark-skinned.
:
There are many ways of re-writing history. One is to annihilate (culturally, socially, through persistently biased media reporting) evidence of civilisation outside our own borders. This does worry me.
:
In the words of the hailed Stevie Wonder (from 'A Time to Love album): 'When the sisters of the world decide they don't want to see their brothers die any more, then the wars will stop.' (Possibly clumsily paraphrased.)
:
And earlier: 'We have come here many times before / To find your strategy to peace is war / Killing helpless men, women and children / That don't even know what they're dying for'

And which of the world's dictators were our one time friends Tom? Look at Saddam. We saw that by arming him we could help him sort out Iran. Well that one came back to bite us! Look at Cameron trawling around the Middle East accompanied by several arms manufacturers. We don't seem to be doing a lot of joined up thinking!

I try to imagine how I would feel if a fringe British group, say the EDL, committed an atrocity against an Islamist state, say Iran. As a consequence a coalition of Islamist states invaded Britain, bombed its cities and killed innocent British people. My grown up sons would join the fight to defend their country and my family and friends, innocent civilians, could be killed.

That's exactly what we have done and then throw up our hands and say 'why do they hate us and why are there more and more terrorists'.

Stupid!

NicM wrote:
And which of the world's dictators were our one time friends Tom? Look at Saddam. We saw that by arming him we could help him sort out Iran. Well that one came back to bite us! Look at Cameron trawling around the Middle East accompanied by several arms manufacturers. We don't seem to be doing a lot of joined up thinking!

Well, I think its always been like that. The only way is to not sell arms to anyone, then at least you reduce the risk of being hoist by your own petard, even if you get your neighbours exocet up your backside.
.
Still, them that think they know best tell us that the arms industry and its exports create and maintain lots of jobs, so thats all right then.

I've added a couple of links.
:
Is it co-incidence that revenge attacks are likely in the UK?
:
And shouldn't we all feel uncomfortable with the killing of an unarmed man?
:
I like the whole thing less and less.
:
It feels like we are not allowed to move on from 9/11.
:
If the British people ever seem to be feeling happier, (long bank holidays/Royal Wedding/sunshine/) or look like they're forgetting that day, someone high up stirs our memories and our hatred. And our fear.
:
There flipping well are other solutions to disagreement between people.
:
Apparently everyone has someone in their lives they'd like to kill. (Some people have more than one...) But we don't. Can't we just scale this moral issue up a bit?

The crux of the matter is, IMO American pride.
I do not think there has ever been such a huge attack actually in their country before - the last comparable one was Pearl Harbour.
So they were angry,outraged and wanted to be seen to be doing something quickly,
Hence the war.
Quite what the UK's excuse was, I don't know - apart from the whole "special relationship" thing.
BUT whether we agree with the method of killing or not, the fact is Bin Laden was responsible for a lot of innocent people's deaths too who also would have been unarmed.
So I cannot agree with your point Rebecca - Bin Laden really does not deserve sympathy.
As for your comments about being allowed to move on from 9/11.....
That was a devastating event that should never be forgotten.It isn't something that should ever be swept under the carpet.

It is very easy for us, sitting in the comfort of our own homes to theorise or take the moral highground but how would any of us have felt had we lost loved ones on that day or the 7th July in London?

demoness wrote:
The crux of the matter is, IMO American pride. I do not think there has ever been such a huge attack actually in their country before - the last comparable one was Pearl Harbour. So they were angry,outraged and wanted to be seen to be doing something quickly, Hence the war. Quite what the UK's excuse was, I don't know - apart from the whole "special relationship" thing. BUT whether we agree with the method of killing or not, the fact is Bin Laden was responsible for a lot of innocent people's deaths too who also would have been unarmed. So I cannot agree with your point Rebecca - Bin Laden really does not deserve sympathy. As for your comments about being allowed to move on from 9/11..... That was a devastating event that should never be forgotten.It isn't something that should ever be swept under the carpet. It is very easy for us, sitting in the comfort of our own homes to theorise or take the moral highground but how would any of us have felt had we lost loved ones on that day or the 7th July in London?

I agree with you D that it should never be forgotten. Uncomfortable as it may be we need to be reminded how utterly appallingly people behave from time to time.
.
The same goes with the holocaust, nuclear bombs in hiroshima and I'm sure, plenty of other atrocities.

The UK sided with America I think out of fear. Better to stand 'shoulder to shoulder' with this mighty power than have them as enemies.
:
And Demoness, how quickly and conveniently we've forgotten how America came to be populated by white folk... one of the biggest crimes against humanity I can think of.
:
And have we forgotten the pig's breakfast that was Dr. David Kelly's 'suicide'?
:
Of course I'm not saying forget 9/11. I just think we are manipulated by the media machine and told what to remember and what to forget.
:
Oh, for the benefits of selective memory...

I don't think we should forget 9/11. However, we should also remember that the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan has killed innocent civilians at a rate of at least 100 for every person killed in the Twin Towers. Those people had families that are mourning their deaths as much as the relatives of the victims in the West have done. Take the moral high ground? The morals of the West are not exactly high on this one. And it is not the relatives of those that have died that are dancing in the streets.

Back to my original point. We are not going to be allowed to make sense of (I won't say forget) 9/11 in a balanced, educated, informed way.
:
Inflaming our mistrust and suspicion means we can keep making/selling weapons and feeling smug and righteous.
:
I'd like to think we could reach a point where (as with Germany) we stop reminding them about the war and the death camps and allow us both to enter a more civilised, meaningful phase.
:
What the media/government is doing now is barbaric. Keeping the primitive, stupid, ignorant warrior in us alive and well.

Speak for yourself. I neither make or sell weapons or feel smug and righteous about anything.
.
Except for feeling smug and righteous about not feeling smug and righteous (like yourself ?).
.
What's all this 'we' and 'our' stuff. Do not speak on my behalf , please.
.
Also I hope I am not primitive , stupid or ignorant or overly influenced by the media or government. You are sounding like a mealy-mouthed politician or one of those sanctimonious religiosos.
.
But that is only my opinion - nobody
elses. No offence intended , of course

NicM wrote:
I don't think we should forget 9/11. However, we should also remember that the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan has killed innocent civilians at a rate of at least 100 for every person killed in the Twin Towers. Those people had families that are mourning their deaths as much as the relatives of the victims in the West have done. Take the moral high ground? The morals of the West are not exactly high on this one. And it is not the relatives of those that have died that are dancing in the streets.

I don't think I was suggesting for one moment that we should forget the innocent civilians that have died in Iraq or Afghanistan and I also do not think that it is a competition as to who has lost the most life.
Life is precious no matter whose life it is.

demoness the second wrote:

NicM wrote:
I don't think we should forget 9/11. However, we should also remember that the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan has killed innocent civilians at a rate of at least 100 for every person killed in the Twin Towers. Those people had families that are mourning their deaths as much as the relatives of the victims in the West have done. Take the moral high ground? The morals of the West are not exactly high on this one. And it is not the relatives of those that have died that are dancing in the streets.

I don't think I was suggesting for one moment that we should forget the innocent civilians that have died in Iraq or Afghanistan and I also do not think that it is a competition as to who has lost the most life.
Life is precious no matter whose life it is.

Absolutely D II, but I don't think many people, especially from the USA, think that. And that goes back to the point of the original blog. Was Osama's life not precious? I do think we rank the importance of people's lives.

NicM wrote:

demoness the second wrote:

NicM wrote:
I don't think we should forget 9/11. However, we should also remember that the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan has killed innocent civilians at a rate of at least 100 for every person killed in the Twin Towers. Those people had families that are mourning their deaths as much as the relatives of the victims in the West have done. Take the moral high ground? The morals of the West are not exactly high on this one. And it is not the relatives of those that have died that are dancing in the streets.

I don't think I was suggesting for one moment that we should forget the innocent civilians that have died in Iraq or Afghanistan and I also do not think that it is a competition as to who has lost the most life.
Life is precious no matter whose life it is.

Absolutely D II, but I don't think many people, especially from the USA, think that. And that goes back to the point of the original blog. Was Osama's life not precious? I do think we rank the importance of people's lives.

Osama's life may well be precious to him and his family. What a shame he did not hold other lives in the same regard.
And this is the same for all despots and fanatics - whether they be American or Asian.
Do you think for one minute he would have not tried to kill the US president?
Let's not build him up as a martyr or someone who should not have been brought to account.
Ideally I would have liked to have seen him stand trial for what he did.
I am uncomfortable with the analogy to be honest. Extremist moslems have been responsible for a lot of atrocities - to their own people as well. In some instances we have been right to intervene.

Okay - hand on heart. I said all life was precious. I was wrong. Innocent life is precious. Life which has already spilt blood, not so much I'm afraid.
That's my view - it may be against the "cosy" academic view point but it is how I feel.
I mourn for the loss of innocent lives. I do not mourn for his.

JBB; you pay taxes right? If you don't, who do you think pays for our military machinery?
:
'We' in the UK.
:
You like to use inflammatory language, don't you?
:
On the contrary, I feel smug and righteous about many things. But it would be irrelevant to list them all here.
:
I'm going all the way back to the subject of my blog.
:
What purpose does the reporting and over-reporting of his death serve?
:
Is it just unbiased, clear, journalism?

D I am not being provocative over this, but in the interests of debate, whose lives are 'innocent'? The women and children we (the coalition) have killed in iraq and Afghanistan.

Yes, OBL would probably have killed the American President if he could. And no doubt if he had there would be people dancing in the streets across the Middle East and other Islamist countries, on the basis that we have killed their innocents and we are seen to be the aggressors, not OBL.

We need to remember that and not see it as some kind of demonstration of Islam being a violent religion.

NicM wrote:
D I am not being provocative over this, but in the interests of debate, whose lives are 'innocent'? The women and children we (the coalition) have killed in iraq and Afghanistan.

Yes, OBL would probably have killed the American President if he could. And no doubt if he had there would be people dancing in the streets across the Middle East and other Islamist countries, on the basis that we have killed their innocents and we are seen to be the aggressors, not OBL.

We need to remember that and not see it as some kind of demonstration of Islam being a violent religion.

I don't think it is for one minute Nic.
All extremists in religion are though.. whether it is Moslem, Christian or Jew. :))