OT: War Bill, write your congress......

Baron Munchausen · #1 September 19th, 2001, 08:01 PM

The problem with this screaming for vengeance is that the actions proposed will result in terrible suffering for millions of people who had nothing to do with the act being avenged. I make no excuses for terrorists. The people actually responsible for the destruction of the WTC should die. But the few hundred people actually responsible, or few thousand at most, are scattered all over the world in small, hidden Groups. Usama Bin Laden is only the visible tip of a very large underground network. Even if we get him there will still be an entire organization out there capable and quite willing to carry out more of the same actions. This is not a task that needs bombs and missiles, but intense investigation and law-enforcement work. If you find a nasty weed in your lawn, do you napalm the whole lawn? Or dig the d*mn weed out? The napalm will kill the grass, but the weed has deeper roots and will probably be the first thing that grows back.

Careful, intelligent use of military force to get compliance from states who are either in secret cooperation with the terrorists or just not strong enough to resist them alone will probably be necessary. But even then we don't have to destroy the civilian population. I hope the current chest-beating by the US is just part of a game of 'good cop/bad cop' but with our past history I guess we can't know. There has been a noticable return of reason in the mass media these Last few days. More and more programs I've listened to on the radio point out that if we just drop thousands of bombs on Afghanistan it will only recruit more terrorists. Others who still watch TV will have to report on what is happening there.

I hope this rationality is also returning to the minds of our government and military officials.

geoschmo · #2 September 19th, 2001, 10:10 PM

I think the US governments position is clear that they want to limit the use of force to that which is necessary to eliminate the terrorist organizations. Note the effort in the Last couple days to downplay a possible Iraqi connection to the terrorist plot. They are trying hard to keep this limited to the actual point at hand, and not allow it to become larger. Whether they will be successful or not remains to be seen.

I think it is obvious, despite the "Get Terrorism everywhere" rhetoric, that Bin Laden is the target. The tough stance towards the government of Afghanistan is expected considering they have protected Bin Laden for so long. We've been wanting to "talk" to the Taleban for years about him, and now when they see their guest has put them at risk, they are willing to talk.

I think the extent of damage to the Afghan military and civilians will be in whatever proportion that they allow themselves to be placed to closely too him.

Calling this a war is basically a way of telling the government of Afghanistan that we are not going to stop at their border and wait for them to turn him over. We will no doubt be putting men on the ground in their country and flying our planes over their airspace, actions that would be considered acts of war. Well, we are saying, this is a war, so we are released of those constraints.

But the objective of this war isn't to take their territory, so it won't be necessary to bomb far and wide, and occupy the country with hundreds of thousands of soldiers.

At least I hope that is what we are doing. Anything more could have serious repercussions. Even keeping to this limited tack is going to take a lot of skill. We don't have much room for error.

Geoschmo

capnq · #3 September 20th, 2001, 05:22 AM

quote:
There has been a noticable return of reason in the mass media these Last few days.

How is that even possible? I can't recall the mass media ever demonstrating any sense of reason about anything. It thrives on hype and hysteria.

------------------
Cap'n Q

The most merciful thing in the world, I think, is the inability of the
human mind to correlate all of its contents. We live on a placid
island of ignorance in the midst of black seas of infinity, and it was
not meant that we should go far. -- HP Lovecraft, "The Call of Cthulhu"

arthurtuxedo · #4 September 20th, 2001, 10:21 AM

Had a long response all ready to go, then the server crashed, and I didn't have the foresight to copy it to the clipboard before attempting to post. Ah well, here's the abridged Version.

Saxon - Sorry for being belligerent. You didn't deserve that. However, I think the point itself was valid. By helping out the nations of the perpetrators of the attack, are you not rewarding them and giving them something they want? Besides, the comparison with Germany becoming our friends doesn't really work. The situations are completely different. Germany was a country with millions of people, comprising the entire political spectrum in views, who had just lost a war. Their country was bombed out, devastated. The terrorists, on the other hand, are a small group of fundamentalist psychopaths who just won the greatest victory of any terrorist organization in recorded history.

dmm - That's the kind of blood-soaked solution we should be trying to avoid. Why should civilians who just happened to be of the same religion and similar nationalities of the terrorists have to pay the ultimate price for the actions of extremists?

dmm · #5 September 20th, 2001, 05:58 PM

quote:
Originally posted by Gritsucker:
dmm - That's the kind of blood-soaked solution we should be trying to avoid. Why should civilians who just happened to be of the same religion and similar nationalities of the terrorists have to pay the ultimate price for the actions of extremists?

Well, I won't try to defend it on moral grounds, since it is hideous. I told you it was a "schizo" response.
However, let me ask you: If a Western (US/Europe/Can/Aus/etc.) government were trying to shelter a "freedom fighter" after he had just killed 5000 civilians in another country, what would be the response from their population? I think we all know the answer.
If the Afghan people do not force their government to hand over bin Laden's entire organization, then they are NOT innocent bystanders. At that point, they will have joined the war against the US. Aiding and abetting a felon is itself a felony.
Telling the police that you will kill anyone coming into your house to search for a criminal, and that you will kill your neighbors if they try to help, makes you a criminal yourself and a legitimate target for police snipers -- especially if you have been harboring said criminal for years and know that he is in your basement right now.

PsychoTechFreak · #6 September 20th, 2001, 07:12 PM

quote:
Originally posted by dmm:

If the Afghan people do not force their government to hand over bin Laden's entire organization, then they are NOT innocent bystanders.

What do you know about the afghan people ? I think we (as western civilization) cannot imagine how it is to be born into a totalitarian regime of religious fanatics. If you open just your mouth to say something in offense, you have to reckon with stoning. The only way to survive the firestorm of the whole world's rage seems to be the flight, but this is impossible because the borders are closed now.

I live about 50 miles away from Hamburg, where 3 of the "sleepers" have come from. Estimations are that about 100 more of the sleepers are still in Germany. Why do not napalm Germany to get rid of the 100 living bombs ? By the way you could balance some old accounts with us.

I pray for the innocent victims, I pray for peace, I pray for the thousands of innocent lives that will certainly be lost in the war that is near at hand, after that we will be two steps back (and I am sure not one step forward).

Baron Munchausen · #7 September 20th, 2001, 07:52 PM

quote:
Originally posted by capnq:

Quote:

There has been a noticable return of reason in the mass media these Last few days.
How is that even possible? I can't recall the mass media ever demonstrating any sense of reason about anything. It thrives on hype and hysteria.

Heh... everything is relative, Capnq. The media has resumed a level of dicsourse more rational than it had during the first week or so after the attack. But then, as I said, I don't watch TV anymore. For me it's NPR and websites. Once in a while I'll watch a cable channel like SciFi or Discovery/TLC but that's it.