Yup, if they were harboring terrorists, you idiot.

Duh! If they would be sponsoring terrorists and not stopping them, then (DUH!) they would be in the same boat, wouldn't they? DUH!

The last two major terrorist attacks in the US have come from right-wing nutters. Still no cruise missiles headed towards Montana. Britain has recently released ALL of the Irish terrorists from it's prisons. These people are now travelling the world, training other terrorists how to terrorise people like they did.
In the list of 60 countries that 'sponsor terrorism' were people like Cuba, a long time thorn in the side of the yanks, but the receiver of US sponsored terrorism, never exporting the same techniques back (Bay of pigs, bombings on the island, etc.). The similar list of communist countries was along the same lines. I recall a British ambassador to the US telling a Mexican guy about Communism (I can't remember the names. Sorry.), he gave an explanation that the Mexican didn't like, and he asked him to try again to describe a communist. After several tries he stated that 'a communist is someone we don't like!'. Says it all really.

if we are talking about the funding of terrorist organisations, maybe the question of the vast amount of funding for the IRA raised in the US should be thrown into the equation.

In response to the 2 comments regarding the 2 people who were calling the guy stupid.......no the US would not declare war......they would use legal means to get the terrorists......Britain harbours terrorists does it not....the IRA...so why does the USA not bomb us....the USA harbours terrorists....i.e Tim Mcvay (spelt wrong)...so clever pomposity....wake up

Are the IRA Terrorists ? Does that make the English government responsible for harbouring them? or the Irish? Should under recent interpretation of NATO regulations the U.S. Government stand by her UK allies and bomb the shit out of Ireland ? these things are complex
An eye for an eye and the world will go blind

Uh, how is the U.S. harboring terrorists? They executed their own home grown one for Oklahoma City; how is the harboring? How can that be considering supporting terrorism? The British support the IRA? The fought their terrorism for years, how is that harboring?

If a country fights against terrorists in their own country, they can't possibly be considered supporting those terrorists (duh). If they put them in prisons, they aren't harboring or supporting them (duh!). It is when they let them live freely among other citzens and do nothing to stop their terrorism at home or abroad, THEN they are considered harboring them. If they give them arms, supplies, or training, then they are supporting them! Geez, are you guys really that dumb?

If the IRA was commiting terrorist acts abroad (they may be), and Britain refused to stop them, then Britain would be considered harboring or supporting them.

Apparently, this is an anti-government, and anti-American website and the writers here are so blinded by their hate of anything American that you won't even allow logic to enter the discussion. The U.S. and all governments have supported governments and non-government entities in history and in many parts of the world. Could some of these have been considered terrorists? Yes. Would the U.S. have been wrong to do so? Yes. Should there be just retribution from those wronged? Yes. Would killing thousands of innocents be right? Wrong. (Please don't bring up Japan; while not noble, it can be defended.) Should the U.S. bomb the hell out of the innocents, on purpose, going after terrorists and state that actively harbor or support terrorists? No. Absolutely, not. Will innocents die in war (this is war, or haven't you been paying attention?)? Yes, sadly, of course. Can one compare killing innocents on-purpose and killing innocents not on-purpose? Not really. Sadly, they are still dead, but to say it is the same thing is to say I am just as guilty if I have a car accident and someone accidently dies as if I take my car and purposely run someone over. No logical person could say I am equally at fault. If you think so, then further discussion is pointless.

The U.S. has every right to kill anyone who tries to kill its citzens when war has been declared on the U.S. (Which it was by Bin Laden.) Especially, when they declare they will kill U.S. citzens, without regard and say they will do so worldwide. And, when they say all Americans must die. Are you guys so stupid as to think in war that we "arrest" people and put them on trial? Don't you guys read what they have said? Or, do you only read what speaks against the U.S. and Israel? They have declared all of these things themselves, freely and openly and they have acted upon them. Are we to do nothing? What would you have us do? Reason with them? If you think reason is anywhere in their vocabulary, you need to read what they've said. There is no reasoning with them and they have stated that as long as America or Israel exists, they will not stop. You can reason with people like this? You can arrest them and supposedly that will stop this? Dumb, very dumb.

Unfortunately, I know that no amount of truth and logic will sway any one of you. Logic? There is none, here, on this website, only anti-government, anti-American, anti-Isreal hatred and an accompanying "logic" that is laughable. Grow up guys! This is the real world and mommy and daddy sometimes have to use force to keep the bad guys away. Or, do you think that they "reason" with them and they won't rob you, rape you, or kill you? Hellllloooooo! There are bad people out there who don't care if you want to reason with them, they just want to do whatever they want to do to you. And, unless you stop them, they will do it. Unless you are open to logical discussion, (i.e. you say something, that you believe and back it up with facts, someone else responds with the same) we have nothing to say to each other. You will just keep spewing anti-something retoric and I will have no logical discussion points to which I can respond.

Good luck in your life, you will need it.