Britons Say Iraq Support Left Country Vulnerable

Discussion in 'Politics & Current Events' started by verybdog, Jul 13, 2005.

  1. verybdog

    verybdog New Member

    Jun 29, 2001
    Houyhnhnms
    Many adults in Britain believe their government’s backing of the coalition effort may have made their country a target, according to a poll by YouGov published in the Daily Telegraph. 72 per cent of respondents believe Britain’s role in Iraq made the country more vulnerable to attack by Islamic terrorists.

    http://www.angus-reid.com/polls/index.cfm/fuseaction/viewItem/itemID/8031

    Had Tony thought about this ?
     
  2. Dante

    Dante Moderator
    Staff Member

    Nov 19, 1998
    Binghamton, NY
    Club:
    Juventus FC
    Nat'l Team:
    United States
    Interesting that the terrorists are thought to be native Brits.
     
  3. Dan Loney

    Dan Loney BigSoccer Supporter

    Mar 10, 2000
    Cincilluminati
    Club:
    Los Angeles Sol
    Nat'l Team:
    Philippines
    Two different questions. Putting resources away from fighting AQ might have made Britain more vulnerable, but specifically because of Iraq is a less likely connection. Withdrawing from Iraq won't help if they're not reapplied correctly.
     
  4. DJPoopypants

    DJPoopypants New Member

    I'm guessing the only reason why it wasn't 100% is that the other people thought they were equally at risk (ie, gonna get hit anyway, Iraq or no).

    Seriously - how stupid can you be to think that jumping into a fight increases your chance of getting hit? You have to weigh the risks and potential benefits.

    Its a stupid poll question. It's like asking a group of people in uruguay if they feel their country's non-overt support has made them more/equally/less likely to get hit than England. Of course a vast majority are gonna say coalition of th shilling country x is more likely to get hurt.
     
  5. Calexico77

    Calexico77 Member

    Sep 19, 2003
    Mid-City LA
    Club:
    Los Angeles Galaxy
    Nat'l Team:
    United States
    I can go back and forth on Christopher Hitchens - I like his writing style, and we agree on many issues. The war in Iraq is not one of them.

    On the other hand, I think this article has some good things to say
    http://slate.msn.com/id/2122186/
     
  6. Dan Loney

    Dan Loney BigSoccer Supporter

    Mar 10, 2000
    Cincilluminati
    Club:
    Los Angeles Sol
    Nat'l Team:
    Philippines
    Well, because they were already a target. Iraq didn't have much to do with AQ's war against the West. At most, it's another brick in the wall, another slide in the Powerpoint presentation.

    Very disappointing that British citizens were involved in this. Richard Reid was out there as an example, but I was hoping he was a lone nut. The racial repercussions are going to be very ugly.
     
  7. verybdog

    verybdog New Member

    Jun 29, 2001
    Houyhnhnms
    Why?
     
  8. verybdog

    verybdog New Member

    Jun 29, 2001
    Houyhnhnms
    These are two questions

    Do you think Britain’s role in Iraq has made the country more vulnerable or less vulnerable to attack by Islamic terrorists?

    Do you think Britain should retain its close alliance with the U.S. in the war on terror, or should it distance itself to a much greater extent from U.S. policy?

    ====

    What's so stupid about it?
     
  9. IntheNet

    IntheNet New Member

    Nov 5, 2002
    Northern Virginia
    Club:
    Blackburn Rovers FC
    Nat'l Team:
    United States
    Righty right old chap... atta boy... perhaps they should have bowed out of the Coalition and instead sent a financial contribution to Al Qaeda and The Taliban and been spared from world terror! Touche! That's it! Bravo!
     
  10. MattR

    MattR Member+

    Jun 14, 2003
    Reston
    Club:
    DC United
    Nat'l Team:
    United States
    I think the big fear is that its British citizens that were involved in all of this.

    In the States, the melting pot ideal is finally falling flat. Recent immigrants are having problems learning the language and integrating. However, 9/11 was done by individuals recruited in terrorist hotspots like Saudi Arabia, where the influences of extremists and religion are to be expected. They imported the terror to the USA, so we can still say "we" were attacked by "them."

    However, if it turns out that individuals who come to a free western country, get jobs, raise families, and are STILL subject to terrorst recruiting, to the point of wanting to kill their adopted countrymen, then this is a significant blow to the idea that simply raising the standards of living in the middle east will have any effect.

    Quite simply, there needs to be a people's revolution against the extremists that preach every friday from state-sanctioned pulpits. Starting with the Saudis.
     
  11. verybdog

    verybdog New Member

    Jun 29, 2001
    Houyhnhnms
    If the money spent on anti-terrorism doesn't bankrupt USA, it will bankrupt GB. In other words, the Brits can't afford it.
     

Share This Page