Former Prime Minister, Benazir Bhutto was killed by a fifteen year old suicide bomber, after returning from a period of exile to run in the countries general elections. According to a three man investigation commission the incident “could have been avoided”. The blame for the murder was placed on Baitullah Mehsud a Taliban leader with ties to Al Qaeda . (CNN News)
The article continues to talk about a lack in the police force in preserving evidence and how a wide range of officials who blatantly failed in protecting Ms. Bhutto, a variety of factors contributed to her losing her life and of course individuals will be punished for there lack of protection over her. My question is, haven't we said nearly every disaster “could have been avoided” sure her security could have been tighter but JFK’s car could have had a roof too. The men stationed at Pearl Harbor could have lined the planes up differently or listened for the warning signs. The airport security for the 9/11 attacks could have been tighter too. Until our defense system includes seeing into the future, we will never expect the unexpected. If by some chance something goes wrong everyone already knows that it “could have been avoided”. Is the news that “Security could have been tighter” a real shocker to anyone? The point is that this was an act of terrorism, and a suicide bomber is obviously willing to risk anything to kill their target.
Unless Ms. Bhutto was kept in an underground bunker for the remainder of her life, we can guess that if the attack fell through this time a more elaborate one would be taken. If the ring leader of the operation which ended Ms. Bhutto’s life truly had ties to the
Al Qaeda, we know from first hand experience that if they really want her dead, they will find a way. Even if they need to fly a plane into a building to do so. The real way to prevent attacks like these is to do a better job at seeking out and killing the groups responsible. Why is America the only one taking it on themselves to do so?
No comments:
Post a Comment