Article <a href="http://www.reuters.com/locales/newsArticle.jsp;:4079ed1b:ff52fa88a4dd6f8e?type=wo rldNews&locale=en_IN&storyID=4798952">here</a>. Looks like this is the insurgents' latest tactic, taking foreign nationals hostages to put pressure on overseas govts. I'm thinking a couple things now:
1) 'Why China?' They're a long-time ally of Iraq's (including while it was under Saddam's rule), and opposed the invasion. Misidentification? Perhaps they thought they were kidnapping more Japanese or South Koreans?
2) This tactic clearly isn't going to work directly, so it must be the indirect result they're after, i.e. convincing people in democracies to vote out the leaders who supported the Iraq invasion. This seems to be working out for them so far (Madrid, possibly Japan). The question is, what's the best response to it (for ordinary people AND leaders)? Doesn't it make it harder for countries that might be inclined to pull out anyway to do so in the face of these tactics (as you then look like you're 'giving in to terror')?<br><br>
1) 'Why China?' They're a long-time ally of Iraq's (including while it was under Saddam's rule), and opposed the invasion. Misidentification? Perhaps they thought they were kidnapping more Japanese or South Koreans?
2) This tactic clearly isn't going to work directly, so it must be the indirect result they're after, i.e. convincing people in democracies to vote out the leaders who supported the Iraq invasion. This seems to be working out for them so far (Madrid, possibly Japan). The question is, what's the best response to it (for ordinary people AND leaders)? Doesn't it make it harder for countries that might be inclined to pull out anyway to do so in the face of these tactics (as you then look like you're 'giving in to terror')?<br><br>
Comment