Assuming Al Qaeda is responsible, is this an indictment against

[chelsea0011]

Bush and Blair for spending billions on an illegal war against Iraq. Money that could have been spent on going after Al Qaeda, the group responsible for 9-11. But the spin that will come from Blair and Bush, and is already happening, is that we must remain vigilant and not back down from the current policy of fighting terrorism. Can you stop everyone from terrorists attacks? Probably not. Can money be spent more wisely in the fight against these attacks? Absolutely. Watch for the Bush administration to use this for politics as usual.

[Felix Mala]

1. Can our mis-leaders continue to say that it's best for brown people

to fight and die against the terrorists so that us white people aren’t threatened?

[ewagner]

2. I can already hear it

can't you?

"Iraq is the Central Front in the War on Terror".

In Iraq we're tracking down those responsible for the (insert number of deaths here) killed in London".

It's going to get worse.

[theboss]

3. I think it's an indictment against naivete.

On all sides. The Right needs to stop thinking that we can eradicate terror. It's just like the war on drugs, the war on poverty, and the war on other plural nouns. Terror is a tactic; you can't stop it. What you need to do is create a political climate where terrorism is less likely. It took the Brits generations to figure that out regarding Northern Ireland. But this notion that by fighting in Iraq, we are stopping terror in the west is just insanely stupid.

I think the Left needs to grow up too. There are bad people out there who don't like us. Islamic terror is real and did not suddenly emerge with the election of Bush. So, some show of strength is necessary. We just need to be smart about it.

[ikri]

4. Blair

Can spin it another way.

There are already rumors floating around that Britain will pull troops from Iraq to increase the numbers of troops in Afghanistan.

Blair now has the opportunity to hasten the pull out and spin it in such a way to show that Britain's interest in hunting down Al Qaeda and Bin Laden are more important than staying in Iraq (since the British controlled areas of Iraq seem relatively secure)

[bloom]

5. It seems like good timing for them.

Justification for what they want to do the their G8 summit.

Bush and Blair as victims, etc.

[second edition]

6. I agree with you, however I have faith that people see through

the politics now and are wondering if we really are winning this war and perhaps we need to rethink our stratagies.

[dhinojosa]

7. You hit the bullseye there. nt

[OneBlueSky]

8. "going after Al Qaeda, the group responsible for 9-11" . . .

well, that's certainly the spin they put on it . . . but I have yet to see ANY hard evidence that al-Qaeda (whatever it is or isn't) is behind anything . . . or that it even exists as anything other than an organizing principle to motivate Islamic militants . . .

I have, however, seen plenty of evidence to suggest that the "official" story of 9/11 is the LEAST likely explanation of what actually happened . . . at the WTC, at the Pentagon, and in Pennsylvania . . . not being a psychic, I obviously have no idea what actually DID happen . . . but I'm pretty sure it wasn't what we have been led to believe . . .

I'm just sayin' . . .