I haven't a clue what Abu Nidal was doing, but whatever it was hadn't troubled the news in the UK (or presumably the US) for 10-15 years. Sure, he deserved to die, preferably more slowly and painfully. But he's not what we invaded Iraq to get - we didn't ask for him to be handed over - he's no excuse, even to Perle. What's so confusing to you about this?
Nor do I know, nor greatly care, why he was executed - quite possibly as Nadine says it was because he refused to do something; he's no loss to the planet. If he was 'facilitating other terrorist groups', as you suggest, then Saddam's evidently on our side, eh?
I don't see how shouting about inactive terrorists is more useful than flushing out the active ones.
As for why people might focus on AQ and its affiliates, well, duh. I can't imagine. Perhaps you should ask Bush, who put them at the top of his most wanted. Oh, yeah, wasn't there a bomb, or maybe a plane hijack/crash or three...??? |
