National Security Case Study Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 2000 words

National Security - Case Study Example But could the security services in the country have done better in preventing these shocking attacks. According to the Guardian (2006), the reports on the cross party intelligence and security committee into the London terrorist's attacks of 7 July 2005 did not find any "evidence of an intelligence failure that could have prevented the bombings." It further says that it only identified "Intelligence gaps." The committee further states that the "comparatively small" capacity of the secret service to conduct conclusive investigations, had also to blame for the attacks. There have been attempts to protect the security forces from any blame or taking of responsibility of a possible failure on their part to prevent the bombings. However, serious questions arise. The first question is could have the security services known about any planned attacks on the British soil. The MI5, which is Britain's domestic spy service, the agency responsible for gathering intelligence on any internal attacks, insists that it did not have any information about the intended bombings. This is supported by the Intelligence and Security Committee Report into the London Terrorist Attacks, which claim that the Secret service had no prior information on possible attacks in London. It however notes that, one of the attackers Siddequine Khan was known to the Security Service before the attacks. These claims have drawn world wide criticism from different individuals, groups and media houses claiming that to the contrary, the security services had prior information about the possibility of an attack from as early as in 2004 but did not only act appropriately. According to WSWS 2007, there was also credible warning by the Saudi Arabian Intelligence about a plot to bomb the Britain. This warning was however dismissed by the security forces as irrelevant. The security forces and the government denied this, even though, The Guardian-2006 reports that there was even credible sources form the White House which confirmed the claim. It further claims that the information from the Saudi intelligence was so specific, that it even noted that the plot involved four Islamic extremists and that the target was London. This has since been confirmed by the Saudi Arabia's ambassador to the United Kingdom. (WSWS 2007). (WSWS 2007) further reports that the Israelis Secret Intelligence Service had also warned the British security services about possible terror attack in London just a few days before the attacks. The Morning star (2007) also reports that the Saudi and French governments had warned the MI5 about the attacks. It from all these claims, it is pro bable that the secret service, had information about the possibility of an attack in the United Kingdom (UK) and more specifically on the UK's rail network. It however did not treat these warnings with the proper attention they deserved. According to WSWS(2007) a statement from the then Prime minister, (Tony Blair), which was quoted in the parliamentary report, revealed that the services had been alerted on a possible attack by terrorists who were British Citizens. It also reports that in May 2005, in the same parliamentary report, it is noted that there was security information that attacks similar to the Madrid bombings would be carried out in the United Kingdom. The Secret service has been criticized for having under surveillance two of the bombers and taking no serious actions to prevent the

OP-ED articles Essay Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 750 words

OP-ED articles - Essay Example The USA president Obama has said that he will look to build consensus in the international community before intervening in Syria (Nicholas and Adam). This necessary means that all major western powers such as Russia , France and UK need to agree on the need for intervention. However whenever USA is asked to send its military to a foreign land in order to ‘liberate’ the people of the country, the voices of those who matter the most are never heard. In this article I will try to bring the spotlight on these voices – the average citizen of USA who pays for the military intervention, the soldier who has to lay down his life and the people of the country who are being ‘liberated’. ... So much amount of public money going down the drain is downright criminal when Congress is telling us that it does not have any money to spend on health, education and social security. How do the citizens of USA benefit by sponsoring these wars in distant foreign lands? What do we gain? No one has ever asked this question. It is time to do so. I think it should be made mandatory for a referendum to be held for intervening in wars which do not belong to us. The decision to bring democracy to distant lands should be a democratic one. If the people vote a yes in the referendum, then the President should be free to intervene in Syria. The people may make a wrong decision but at least it will be their decision, not the decision of NATO or a war hungry president. If we are paying for these wars, it is the USA soldiers who are dying in these wars.2220 USA soldiers have laid down their lives in Afghanistan (Icasualties.org.) and 4488 young soldiers have been killed in the Iraqi war (Antiwar. com.).As so many of them lay down their lives, it is just that they also have say in which wars to fight and which ones to avoid. Some people may say that as soldiers they have no right to have a say, it is the prerogative of the elected legislature. I agree that it is the prerogative of the legislature and the President of USA to declare wars; and I also agree that soldiers when they join the army agree to serve our nation without any question. But we have made an army to defend our country and fight our wars; not to liberate Syria or Libya. An army man will be more than happy to lay down his life for his motherland but why should he kill himself for people he has never met and who mean nothing to him. The death of our soldiers when there is no threat