"The Economist makes a good point today:What the attacks also show, however, is that well co-ordinated though the four explosions were, they were not terribly effective. Chance plays a big role in such attacks. The bombs in Madrid last year which killed 191 people might have killed many more had the station roof collapsed. The September 11th hijackings might have killed fewer than the eventual 2,752 had the twin towers of the World Trade Centre not melted down and collapsed. As The Economist went to press, the toll in the four London bombs was not clear, but the estimate of at least 33 deaths was thankfully far smaller than in Madrid. By the terrible calculus of terrorism, the attacks should thus be counted as a failure - sign of weakness, not strength.And no WMDs. For that, relief."
Yeah Andy, I bet the people who were on this bus are relieved about this giant example of failure.Tom Tomorrow kindly reminds us of Andy's past wankerness:
"If the terrorists leave us alone in Iraq, fine. But if they come and get us, even better. Far more advantageous to fight terror using trained soldiers in Iraq than trying to defend civilians in New York or London."
No comments:
Post a Comment