The bombings of the two cities bring to fore concerns of terrorism and its global effects on the security of the nationals of any given country in the world. Such occurrences have taken several cities by surprise.One such acts on innocent citizens include that of the city of London and Oklahoma. There are clear similarities of the two incidences. In both cases the perpetrators planned the attacks before executions.The authorities both cities were not alerted on the events hence it threw the public into panic. It is also evident from the two cases that the suspects involved were on a revenge mission. The London attack was as a result of Muslim brotherhood revenge mission for British involvement in the Iraq war while the Oklahoma incident was an aggrieved suspect who avenged against the authorities.it is also clear that in both incidences the suspects hoped to escape. They had a master plan that ensured that after their intentions are accomplished then they could easily escape to safety, since the authorities were believed not to beware of such cases. In both cities the security alert system was functional, especially within the city centers. However such kind of atrocities had never occurred at these areas hence they were little expected. It from this kind of argument that one can therefore argue that security alerts systems of both were not prepared to face this task. During the Oklahoma bombing the suspect believed that jobs were granted to minorities unlike the whites like him who could not access them (Giordano 2003:11). This also leads to the fact that the two bombings were a clear indication of racism. In London, the Britons of Arabic descent attacked the white race while in the Oklahoma City it was a white that showed discord over the rights enjoyed by other races regarded as minorities. There were differences that emerged in the two attacks.
In the bombings of London it was clear that it was a retaliation of the British invasion and occupation of Iraq. The Oklahoma incident involved an attacker disappointed by his own states policies. In the London incident, it occurred only after the government engaged in war against the perceived brothers in the Arab world.The Oklahoma incident was however different in the sense that the attacker had developed this hatred right from childhood. In the London incident the attackers lived together with the fellow citizens and had nothing against the other people but the attacker of Oklahoma was always indifferent in interactions with his fellow citizens of different race. The Britons did not regard themselves conspicuously as minorities and the majorities. This however was clear in the minds of Americans. In his writing of the patriots, politics and the Oklahoma bombing, Stuart A Wright regards Timothy McVeigh as a hero and patriot (Wright 2007:2). This was a message sent to the state by the majority against its unpopular policies while the London case involved the minority sending a message to the majority group.
The Oklahoma City bombing was as a result of unpopular laws that segregated the rest of the citizens from access to equal job opportunities. This kind of stratification should have been addressed once the government heard the outcry from one segment of the society. This could have created a fair competitive opportunity to be exploited by all the citizens hence avoid the polarization of the society. It is also important for the state to address the issue of unemployment by equipping the students with the relevant skills and also empower them to face the challenges that they face after school. It is quite evident that if the state could have provided the conducive atmosphere that did not leave any group of the population idle, then such incidences could have been averted. The accessibility to small arms also contributed a great deal in the Oklahoma City bombings. The state should have strict policies governing the access and use of small arms. The training of the military personnel should include psychological counseling and discipline to avoid misuse of the knowledge and skills acquired on citizens of any given state. It is important that the federal government addresses the issues raised by movements that crop up whenever any segment of the society feels downcast. It is dangerous to reject the issues raised by anti-government factions as depicted in the writings of Dyer, Joel Harvest of rage: why Oklahoma is just the beginning, the state should not therefore tolerate such factions not by proscribing them only but ensuring that they articulate all the problems and solve them amicably.
On the other hand the London bombings posed a great challenge that exists in the fabrics of our society. The world being a global village has made people in the Diaspora to identify themselves with the country of their origin. This includes even the religious affiliations. It is therefore necessary that the immigrants of any country be encouraged to practice patriotism in the countries that they have received new citizenship. This would have made the British Muslims identify themselves more with Britain than Iraq. It is also important that the religious leaders especially in the Muslim faith discard hate preaching and speech to avoid building acrimony in the state. The security alert system should be revamped and be able to cover the whole state. Any incident should be expected, hence the need for preparedness for such unprecedented attacks. The government should be able to weigh every decision It makes at the international level since , it has a direct impact on the society perception at home. The British involvement in Iraq and Afghan should not have been a rush decision. This should have been addressed by all the leaders in Britain, including the Muslim, so that they would have understood that the troops were not sent to attack their brothers unfairly, but to fight against oppressive regimes in the Arab world. While it seems that there were similarities in both cases, it was also apparent that such incidences could also be linked to bombings in other cities, both in the country of their occurrences and in other parts of the world. The 7 July 2005 London bombings can be linked to the bombings that took place later own 21 July 2005. On the same vein, it was still manifested in the train attacks in the Madrid City of Spain. In the second attack in the city of London the authorities seemed to have learnt from the previous bombings. There was evidence of preparedness, especially with regard to the emergency response. The security search for the suspects was had been beefed up. In Madrid the world came in aid.
Several lessons can be learnt from the above cases of terrorism. These acts of atrocities have been witnessed all over the world. All the continents have been affected. In the beginning it was disguised to refer to war against America and its sympathizers. Any nation deemed to embrace the ideologies of the west, were regarded as enemies of the Arab states. This made them vulnerable to terrorist attack, especially from Islamic extremists. However it is now clear that almost every race or state is under the threat of attack. All nations who believe in democracy must unite to fight terrorism globally. It is also clear that the innocent citizens of any nation are the ones who bear the brunt of terrorism. If the terrorist claim to be fighting America and its allies , then neutral countries such as Tanzania should not have been attacked at any cost (Ferguson 2003:7). The acts of terror witnessed in Somalia where no traces of influence of the west can be cited, further underscores the fact that terrorism has a different motive other than the one purported.it is also evident that religious extremists should not be allowed to control any integral segment of the society. This kind of leaders led to hatred amongst different religious groups. Every individual should be able to tolerate other religious beliefs. After all we all live in one society, hence we should choose to embrace one another or destroy ourselves in selfish ambitions of achieving religious ends. The world through the United Nations Security Council, should at all times engage in dialogue to resolve any international concerns i.e. nuclear weapon development. Military interventions should always be last alternative after all options have tried and failed. The sovereignty of any given country must be respected by all nations. The United Nations should not be used by any given state to achieve selfish ambitions. All nations should allow democratic space to be enjoyed by all people and the rule of law must always be upheld. Developed nations should move fast to boost the security systems of vulnerable countries. This can be done through training of security personnel in these counties, equipping them and revamping their alert systems. All the nations should understand that global development, can only be achieved in a peaceful environment. Terrorism will only destroy the world, encourage polarization of the world based on unfounded ideologies and reduce investment in economically viable projects instead of militarism. The world should unite in ensuring that proliferation of small arms is put under check. Other dangerous weapons should put under control. Countries should only develop their weapons with a valid reason. The movement of people from one nation to another should be done within the acceptable parameters. The security concerns within such cases should never be compromised. The terrorism poses a great threat to mankind. While we seem to have different ideologies, it is now evident that the world must now agree to work as a unit to fight this menace. Terrorism also poses a threatening challenge to economic indicators: these include tourism in that some nations might term other countries as unsafe for their citizens to visit. It also reduces investor confidence to both national and international opportunities. This will lead to narrowed economies hence economic recession. It can also be argued that terrorism is bound to destroy the social interaction space that we enjoy. This means that other race might be demonized at the expense of few hence further promote racism. All must fight terrorism.
Reference
Dune, L (2005, July 07). The US stocks rise, erasing losses on London bombings. P.1
Ferguson , (2003). A The attack against the U.S Embassies in Kenya and Tanzania. Venice: federal house.
Giordano ,G. (2003). The Oklahoma city Bombing. New York: The Rosen publishing house.
Hoffman, D. (1998). The Oklahoma city Bombing and the politics of terror. Venice: Federal house.
Joel, D (1998) Harvest of Rage: Why Oklahoma is just the begging. New York: Rosen publishers.
Mark, T. (2006, April 09). Leak reveals official story of the London bombings. The guardian.p.3
Wright, S.A (2007). Patriots, patriots and Oklahoma Bombing. Cambridge: Cambridge university press.