| Submit your comments on this article | |
| Britain | |
| Straw Still On Board WOT | |
| 2004-03-20 | |
| EFL The international community could have prevented September 11 and other terrorist attacks by acting far earlier against al-Qa’eda rather than "turning the other cheek", Jack Straw, the Foreign Secretary, admits today. In an interview with the Telegraph on the first anniversary of the Iraq war, Mr Straw says that despite the attack on Madrid which killed 202 people, the world is winning the war on terror. "What the international community should have done is to heed the earlier warnings about the nature of al-Qa’eda and taken earlier action to deal with it and the failing state which was harbouring it, which was Aghanistan," he says. "Because if we had have done we might have avoided September 11 and everything that has followed that." His message is that the war on terrorism, while left too late, is the only way to combat a "cholera of the mind" that has infected "maniac" fundamentalists and made the world more dangerous. His remarks contain implicit criticism of the former American administration led by President Bill Clinton, whose country was the main target for al-Qa’eda, and suggests that the war on terror should have been launched in the mid-Nineties. This guy’s Labour, right? Mr Straw says he understands British people’s heightened feelings of insecurity after the Madrid attacks and says he has often thought about the war on terror and the wisdom of attacking Saddam. But he has always concluded that both were right. The strategy of using force against Saddam is already paying off, he claims, citing the decision by Libya to destroy its weapons of mass destruction and progress in getting Iran to comply with internatonal demands over its weapons programme. "I have never said that the reason we have been able to secure compliance from Libya and Iran was because in any sense they felt militarily threatened by the coalition but the effect was more subtle but nonetheless powerful. They felt threatened by Saddam and removing Saddam took away a threat and also exposed them to diplomatic action. So when the history books come to be written and when people are able to stand back they will be able to see that the strategy has been rational and effective."
The Brits have what it takes. Can’t wait to see how John Howard tops it. | |
| Posted by:Mr. Davis |
| #3 Just listening to the BBC's output in the last two days suggests to me they've decided to ramp up the anti-government nonsense in a big way. Anyone else hear "Any Questions" on BBC Radio 4 yesterday/today? Worse than ever. Basically, they assembled a panel of three lefties vs. Norman Tebbit, and had Peter Tatchell bait Tebbit about gay rights from early on. Tebbit's hemi-semile now, and sounded as though he could have been tranquilised himself. All sorts of bullshit was spouted regarding the Spanish elections (including the lie that Aznar deliberately deceived the electorate) and was left, from what I heard (before switching off in disgust), totally unchallenged. It's not spin any more - it's out-and-out deceit. The BBC seems to consider itself the official opposition to the government. Its world view is in trouble like never before, and it might just be undergoing some sort of meltdown. Here's hoping. BBC delenda est! Eh, Howard?! |
| Posted by: Bulldog 2004-3-20 9:35:47 AM |
| #2 just hope hes right when he says the british people won't be blackmailed by them, i fear the lefty BBC and likes of Al Gaurdian will create as much awful press and news, they'll go on a campaign,that new 10 part docu drama the BBC are running at the moment called 'If' is the first part of thier campaign against the goverment,watch them drop to more Gilligan style stories and Panarama specials supposedly exposing Blair and his party.A terror attack combined with this all out lefty propaganda campaign could unfortuanatly seal the U.K's fate. :( |
| Posted by: Jon Shep U.K 2004-3-20 8:35:16 AM |
| #1 Yes this guy is labour. But in May 1940 the Conservatives, who were dominant in the Governemnt of national coalition, wanted to nominate a soft guy as PM, perhaps reinstate Chamberlain. It was the Labour people who told that the only Conservative they would accept as PM was Churchill. But these were 193x Labour vintage: people who were in the Party to improve the life of the working classes not the self esteem of blue-blooded chic leftists. |
| Posted by: JFM 2004-3-20 7:16:58 AM |