The Rak Was a Legitimate Target in the War on Terror, She Said.

2min Snip

00:00

Play full episode

Summary

Transcript

Episode notes

I was trying to answer another pointof this. I don't find it very logical to link afghanistan, or what we did in afghanistan in response to nine 11, with therak. Howt the war on terror should it have been? Well, i, i personally was certainly against the war in a rak, but iam not linking it with attack on terror. All right. Thi madi, we had that questions the jermy greenstock on the policing firm crimes and terrorism, and the policy had failed. Well, it was whether that questoe said, policing failed miserably. That's right. And things were missed before nine 11, both internationally

Have the West’s efforts to eradicate Al-Qaeda around the world simply been fuelling the flames of hatred and violence? Or would we have suffered even more atrocities if we’d left the militants to plot in their hiding places? Is the US right to be pursuing its hard line against militants in countries such as Pakistan and Yemen? These are just some of the questions explored in this Intelligence Squared debate from September 2011, which saw former President of Pakistan Pervez Musharraf and former US Deputy Assistant Secretary of State for Public Diplomacy Colleen Graffy defend the motion. Opposing the motion were former French foreign minister and co-founder of Médecins Sans Frontières Bernard Kouchner and former UK Permanent Representative at the United Nations in New York Sir Jeremy Greenstock. The debate was chaired by BBC World News presenter Zeinab Badawi.

Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/intelligencesquared.

See acast.com/privacy for privacy and opt-out information.

Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices