More reports justify terrorism

Iraq war 'fuelling UK terrorism'

Iraq 'has been used as an excuse' for terror, says Downing Street.

Sigh.

"Downing Street has distanced itself from leaked papers suggesting Iraq is fuelling terrorism, stressing they were not drawn up by its officials. The papers demand a "significant reduction in the number and intensity of the regional conflicts that fuel terror activity".

The papers then set out a list of perfect scenarios in a series of troublespots - including stability for Iraq and Afghanistan -10 years from now. As well as Israel living in "peaceful coexistence" with its Arab neighbours and Iran devoid of nuclear weapons, they say that there should be "no new failed states, dictatorships or wars" in the Middle East and South Asia.

"If all or most of the above were in place, threats from other sources of Islamic terrorism (eg Indonesia, Philippines, Nigeria) would be manageable or on the way to resolution," they conclude.

What was Saddam if he wasnt a dictator? Who and how will a non nuclear Iran come about? When Israel withdrew from Gaza did Hamas go about creating a peaceful environment or feel emboldened to carry on with terrorism? Who doesnt want a stable Middle East? Which side is unquivocal about a peaceful co existence with Israel? Who else but the West will influence a reduction in failed states, dictatorships and wars? Even Sudan will be seen as malign western interference.

The conclusion drawn comes as no surprise - submit, appease, submit! Lets have our foreign policy dictated by threats please!

"Any remaining deployments of the British armed forces should be seen as contributing to international stability and security." Actions should be designed to reduce terrorism, "especially that in or directed against the UK".

Afghanistan is precisely that scenario. There were no anti war demos when troops were sent there to oust the Taleban - but its become a useful number to add to the list of grievances now. The troops are contributing to stability and security there and were welcomed by the people, just as they were when Saddam was ousted. If the West is not seen as such it is largely down to the media, anti war spin and rubbish that spews forth from the Left and their buddy jihadis who dont really care what is happening anywhere... provided it makes a good slogan.

If anything it is these reports, platformed by the media which contribute to the threat of terrorism - by justifying their actions.

I thought this was an interesting comment piece in last weeks Telegraph:

Bush is wrong: Iraq is not Vietnam

"The Vietnam war was not lost on the battlefield, but in the American media's treatment of news from the front line"