![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
The way of the exploding milkbottle*
The best thing about terror alerts is that they make it a lot easier to get a seat on the tube to work in the morning.
First up, thumbs up to the security services. If half of what we're being told is true (and it looks as if it is) then they've done a bang-up job. Needless to say I expect that the usual conspiracy theorists will pop out of the woodwork to claim that this is all a fit up by Blair and Bush, but I'm always remnded of the Watergate conspiracy where Nixon couldn't keep a lid on a conspiracy involving six people. Suggesting a conspiracy involving what would have to be hundreds is so unlikely as to be unbelievable, so stop it before you start. Thumbs up for James Bond and his International Pals. Let me buy you a pint.
Overall, though, I'm not actually surprised by any of this; either the efficiency of the security forces, or the fact that the bombers existed. If you were to say to me that in a nation of 60+ million people there existed maybe 20-30 people willing to kill hundreds, my reaction would not be a breathlessly horrified "Really?", but more surprise at there being so few. On any bell-curve of population, every Dalai Lama and Nelson Mandela has to be offset by the odd frothing lunatic. All that has happened in the last few years is that the internet has made it easier for said frothing lunatics to hook up with one another. The good thing, on the reverse, is that the internet has made it more convenient for the rest of us to ruthlessly mock them.
You shouldn't be surprised that the Frothing Lunaticstm are targetting civilian populations. There are two reasons for this:
1) It is ultimately, an admission of defeat.
As the IRA only started to mostly target civilian targets when they realised that they'd effectively lost, so our current batch of frothing lunatics (FL's) are doing the same. I've said it before, but it bears re-iterating. We (as in the western cultural/economic hegemony, not just me and my friends list), have won - at least until the Chinese decide to make us their bitches, and whilst the FL's might be a danger to our lives, they are most certainly not an effective danger to our society.
It's a situation analagous to, say, Accrington Stanley playing Bayern Munich; eight-one down with five minutes to go, plucky little Terrorism is still going for the ball and making like they can come back to win it.
2) The above (1) is because the fight here is not actually one of weapons, but it is one of ideas. As most people seem outraged that the FL's are targetting non-military targets, there's something else to bear in mind. We are all, in their eyes, 'enemy combatants'. If you happen to think that Bacon Butties are a grand idea and compulsory bushy beards for men aren't, then you're actively engaged in a war of ideas whether you like it or not, and some people are willing to detonate themselves to prove you wrong.
The problem is that in this war of ideas, one side has belatedly realised that they're unarmed and they've started throwing their toys out of the pram with explosive force.
Like I say, though, for all the hoo-ha about the FL threat, they're not much of a threat to our overall society. I'm more concerned by the fact that John Prescott is currently wedged into an overstuffed chair in No.10 with one porky finger on The Button and another on his secretary's arse than I am about the possibility of getting blown up on the tube home tonight.
They threaten my life, but all they've actually managed to do this time round is make some people cancel thier holidays. Thanks to our fantastic police service and their own ultimate ideological failure, they're unlikely to manage much more than that.
And, when it comes down to it, there's really only one thing to do with people who aren't really that much of a threat to our way of life:
*![[livejournal.com profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/external/lj-userinfo.gif)
flywingedmonkey: After our conversation yesterday, I thought "Sod it, this one is too good not to use."
First up, thumbs up to the security services. If half of what we're being told is true (and it looks as if it is) then they've done a bang-up job. Needless to say I expect that the usual conspiracy theorists will pop out of the woodwork to claim that this is all a fit up by Blair and Bush, but I'm always remnded of the Watergate conspiracy where Nixon couldn't keep a lid on a conspiracy involving six people. Suggesting a conspiracy involving what would have to be hundreds is so unlikely as to be unbelievable, so stop it before you start. Thumbs up for James Bond and his International Pals. Let me buy you a pint.
Overall, though, I'm not actually surprised by any of this; either the efficiency of the security forces, or the fact that the bombers existed. If you were to say to me that in a nation of 60+ million people there existed maybe 20-30 people willing to kill hundreds, my reaction would not be a breathlessly horrified "Really?", but more surprise at there being so few. On any bell-curve of population, every Dalai Lama and Nelson Mandela has to be offset by the odd frothing lunatic. All that has happened in the last few years is that the internet has made it easier for said frothing lunatics to hook up with one another. The good thing, on the reverse, is that the internet has made it more convenient for the rest of us to ruthlessly mock them.
You shouldn't be surprised that the Frothing Lunaticstm are targetting civilian populations. There are two reasons for this:
1) It is ultimately, an admission of defeat.
As the IRA only started to mostly target civilian targets when they realised that they'd effectively lost, so our current batch of frothing lunatics (FL's) are doing the same. I've said it before, but it bears re-iterating. We (as in the western cultural/economic hegemony, not just me and my friends list), have won - at least until the Chinese decide to make us their bitches, and whilst the FL's might be a danger to our lives, they are most certainly not an effective danger to our society.
It's a situation analagous to, say, Accrington Stanley playing Bayern Munich; eight-one down with five minutes to go, plucky little Terrorism is still going for the ball and making like they can come back to win it.
2) The above (1) is because the fight here is not actually one of weapons, but it is one of ideas. As most people seem outraged that the FL's are targetting non-military targets, there's something else to bear in mind. We are all, in their eyes, 'enemy combatants'. If you happen to think that Bacon Butties are a grand idea and compulsory bushy beards for men aren't, then you're actively engaged in a war of ideas whether you like it or not, and some people are willing to detonate themselves to prove you wrong.
The problem is that in this war of ideas, one side has belatedly realised that they're unarmed and they've started throwing their toys out of the pram with explosive force.
Like I say, though, for all the hoo-ha about the FL threat, they're not much of a threat to our overall society. I'm more concerned by the fact that John Prescott is currently wedged into an overstuffed chair in No.10 with one porky finger on The Button and another on his secretary's arse than I am about the possibility of getting blown up on the tube home tonight.
They threaten my life, but all they've actually managed to do this time round is make some people cancel thier holidays. Thanks to our fantastic police service and their own ultimate ideological failure, they're unlikely to manage much more than that.
And, when it comes down to it, there's really only one thing to do with people who aren't really that much of a threat to our way of life:
*
flywingedmonkey: After our conversation yesterday, I thought "Sod it, this one is too good not to use."
no subject
Of course not. That doesn't mean that the FL's don't blieve that though.
Incidentally, given that we "rape" them for oil, how come we pay so much for it?
When you say "we pay so much" does that mean the west paying the middle east for it or consumers paying at the pumps?
And are you saying that if someone rapes a hooker, then throws £10000 at her, does that mean she wasn't raped but instead paid well for her services?
no subject
Maybe we should stop taking their oil. If we could provide it from elsewhere then the Middle East dictatorial and religious regimes propped up by oil revenues would fast collapse, because they haven't got anything else to export except terrorists.
no subject
The great tragedy of the Middle East is that Saudi didn't go the same way as the UAE and pour their oil revenues into the development of infrastructure which would provide revenues and work once the oil ran out. So effective has the UAE policy been that they'll be able to turn the oil off in 2010 without damaging their economy. By co-incidence, the UAE doesn't appear on any lists of states sposoring terrorism, because people having good jobs and aspirations makes them less likely to go off on killing sprees.
no subject
The rare-ish examples of moderate and sensible government like the UAE are exactly what we should be encouraging. It's also why I think we should have "Marshall Plan"'ed Afghanistan and Iraq, made them into relatively prosperous beacons.
It's also why the situation in Lebanon is so tragic. They had a largely moderate government which was promoting infrastructure and economic development, and the country was doing well. Which is exactly why Hizbollah made a specific effort to provoke Israel, because they saw the writing on the wall if Lebanon was a moderate, semi-secular and prosperous state - there's a lot less room for militant Islamic terrorists. Now Hizbollah, despite provoking the situation that has ruined that improved prosperity, can puff their chests out and get all the locals to see them as their heroes again.
no subject
Bloody Hizbollah.
no subject
(Anonymous) 2006-08-11 01:51 pm (UTC)(link)no subject
no subject
no subject
no subject
(Anonymous) 2006-08-11 01:13 pm (UTC)(link)no subject
no subject
I'll remember to mention that to the very talented scientists and engineers I know who have come from the Middle East ;o)
no subject
no subject
That's a brain drain rather than an export though. Presumably those scientists and engineers got out of there because they are educated and marketable, and they couldn't take full advantage of that in the countries they left. It's a demonstration of the failure of Middle Eastern governments that their best and brightest feel the need to leave for democratic and capitalist societies in order to take full advantage of their skills.
no subject
My point regarding the scientists and engineers is this: they come from the Middle East as well as the West and the East meaning that they would be perfectly capable of producing decent exports if they didn't have to leave. Though to be fair most of the engineers and scientists I met were while I was at Uni and most of them returned home after their study.