The Society for Stating The Bleedin’ Obvious has been at it again. The headlines this morning mark the death of former Prime Minister Ted Heath, but also anounce the conclusion of a Royal Institute of International Affairs and Economic and Social Research Council report, concluding that participating in the Iraq war may have increased the likelyhood of a terrorist attack on Great Britain.
You don’t say! So what conclusion is to be drawn from this report? That we would have been better off not acting for fear of offending the Taleban and Saddam? The usual Mrs Angry of Lowestoft will have a field day with this report, stating that it vindicated the the anti-war position of a vocal minority. Jack Straw has at least put it in context, reminding Mrs Angry that “the terrorists have struck across the world, in countries allied with the United States, backing the war in Iraq and in countries which had nothing whatever to do with the war in Iraq.”
Yes, our participation in the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq undoubtedly did increase the likelihood of terrorist attacks on British soil, but the attacks on the World Trade Center on 11th September 2001 were not done in response to any clear action on the part of the United States. To say that we should have done nothing shows downright historical ignorance and is tantamount to saying that we should just roll over to terrorists’ demands.
You know what? I’ve just realised something. We could have avoided that whole nasty World War 2 thing if we just hadn’t taken up arms against Hitler. I reckon that whole declaring war on Germany upset a lot of Nazis. Naughty Mr Chamberlain!