Haven what would it take for you to put down your friggin textbooks and fight for your country? The freedoms you enjoy that allow you to question government policy have been paid for in blood. What would it take for you to protect those freedoms for others as they have been protected for you?
Uh, thats not what I said at all. I was replying to your callous implication that we shouldn't care about civilian casualties we might cause.
Haven, As I have said about 2 or 3 other times , nobody here came out and said, "the US got what it deserved." No, what they did is assign blame aka played the blame game. You can call it brainwashing on my part that I'm not going to get into blaming the US govt for this. I guess Bin Laden and his followers haven't been brainwashed or better yet Palestinians brainwashed that all Americans are evil and must die? All I ever tried to say or convey is that now is not the time to get into big history lessons about the Middle East and how the US's foreign policy is what drove these sickos to create a terrifying tragedy. I really hope that we don't go to war, but if we have to then I fully support that decision. Now is not the time to be on our government's case. Let's save the diatribes for another time--say like when there aren't any immediate threats to US citizens, okay?
So what do you want me to do? Go sign up with the nearest army recruiter? I'm not eager for blood. I'm afraid that if we go to war, the only result will be the loss of more innocent blood. You'd have to be a fool to want that. If I believed we were taking effective action, and my presence was necessary and just, I would probably go to war. But starting some absurd bombing campaign that attacks indiscriminantly would be a mistake. How are we different, if we kill innocent people in doing what we believe? Life is sacrosanct. Sometimes, civilian casualties are unavoidable. But such decisions must be addressed soberly, with regret, and only affirmed if we believe that action will be effective. I don't see such precaution being advocated on this board. I see so much hatred, and so little introspection. So little concern for why this is happening. I want people to stay away from knee-jerk reactions, and do what is right and best in the long-term.
guys, i think we all need to take a step back and think with our minds not with our hearts, as hard as that may be. I don't think there is a definite right and wrong way to approach this act of hatred by terrorists. If Bush does nothing, it will seem to the American Public that he doesnt show remorse for the people who were victims of this awful tragedy. However, if we just kill Bin Laden, we make him into a martyr for his cause, likely the organization will appoint a new leader and, guess what, i wouldnt be surprised if they united to harm to United States in ways I dont even want to imagine. Unfortunately, I dont think we can destroy the roots of terrorism for good, because as human beings we will never fully like everyone and actions they do in life and to me, I dont like the idea of all the Middle East suffering from Bin Ladens group's actions. This is the problem with the media today, since its all about making money, they show events like this in a way to get us closer to the action and be must more tempted to react with feeling than thinking things through. It does us no good just to immediately retaliate, because, in all honestly we will have sunk to their level and as the biggest superpower in the world, we will hamper our reputation and what we stand for forever. Also, consider this, we have involved ourselves in many different countries and foreign affairs over the yrs beginning with Central America and Eisenhower, dont blind yourselves to think that we as a nation are perfect and have never done things to make others hate us for good, because in all honestly you are fooling yourself and creating a portrayal of the world which will never likely seize to exist, at least not in our lifetime. Overall, if you choose to label me as Anti-American because of my stance, it wont bother me, because it simply isnt the case. We, as a nation, are in a no win situation and thus, the ultimate goal should be to find out the reasons for this malicitous event and the role we played in fostering them so we can make changes and hopefully heal many of the psychologically damaging wounds weve already caused, if its not too late, plus it leads to a well designed retaliation and one that will hopefully be more helpful than just barging into these countries right this minute.
First off you confused the heck out of me with your babble of "no,no,no". It would have been nice if you had explained that like you did above that way I don't have to guess. Do you think Bin laden's attitude was callous when his followers acted out his plan? Or do you think it was worse or not as bad? I resent the hell out of you making a broad statement about me when you don't even know me. I don't want to see innocent people die, but how innocent are the Taliban and other people in Afghanistan that knew of Bin Laden's initiatives? Get off your high horse and realize that the US is going to get retribution. It would be so idealistic if no innocent people get killed; however, Bin Laden should have thought of the consequences of this happening before he enacted out his "plan".
I want you to answer the god damn question. I want to know what would cause you to be so full of disgust that you would not hesitate to go to war. You see haven, if throughout the history of the United States our government and military leaders sat around on their collective asses contemplating civilian casualties and the friggin sacrosanctity of life you would not have the freedoms that you have today. You call out the hypocrisy of American policy yet ignore your own damn hypocrisy. You're fortunate to have that luxury and obviously have yet to realize that.
In the future, I will take this under consideration. Callous does not begin to describe it. I resent the hell out of your limited reading comprehension. I didn't make a statement about YOU, if you have trouble distinguishing between something said about something you SAY, and YOU PERSONALLY you need to be more careful in the future. How many people knew about what Bin Laden was planning? Huh? Why should some poor Afghani farmer get killed, just because he was in the way? That makes us no better than them - they killed civilians to gain an objective, if we don't take great paind to avoid killing civilians, we might as well give up now because the real war is already lost.
OK guys, I know I'm not exactly the most popular guy here since I started the "clique" accusation and all that, but in this particular situation you guys need to at least consider what I'm about to write. I have been studying the terrorism for over 5 years and am pretty "up" on it, and I have written two separate papers on the subject that I know were passed on to defense officials via an organization that was contracted to study the problem in 1999. Before I write an assessment here I must say that while I've been predicting this type of attack for several years, I am still absolutely shocked to see it happen. I had thought it would be a biological attack, not a conventional attack, that would kill this many people. But that is a nuance. I am still absolutely shocked, even though I knew that something like this would happen. I posted these assessments on another message board, so I'll just repost it here: I know that we Americans are pis*ed off right now, but I just hope that we will have the fortitude to stay focused and motivated throughout the "sustained campaign" effort. I for one will have no problem with that, but I have concerns that many other Americans will be able to do it. I don't think that many Americans really understand what's coming. Yes, we are going to take Bin Laden out. Yes, we are going to attack Afghanistan, likely actually invade it with the help of the Russians. Most Americans understand that and support it. But it is not going to stop there. Iraq is going to be reinvaded. We know for a fact that Saddam has again been stockpiling anthrax - and where do you think it's intended to end up. I've been saying we have to reinvade for years, and now it seems that everyone else might finally be in the mood to go along with that. But it won't stop there either. Libya has built a chemical weapons facility that is absolutely impervious to conventional air attacks. Gadafhi is reportedly scared s*itless now, so he might cooperate and dismantle it, but if he doesn't then we WILL destroy it. There are only two ways to do this: a ground raid/invasion, or a "spiked" nuclear weapon (Perry confirmed this weapon's existence several years ago). That facility WILL be destroyed, one way or another. But it won't stop there. Iran is a known terrorist supporter, and has at least 3 terrorist training bases. It also supports Hizbollah in Lebanon and the occupied territories. Those training bases will be wiped out. If the Iranian govt doesn't do it, then we will. They will be told as such. If they get in the way, then they will be regarded as hostile and dealt with accordingly. Syria is another terrorism supporter, also with numerous training bases. The same situation as with Iran. The Sudan is also in this same boat - it has bases, and they will be destroyed whether the Sudanese govt cooperates or not. North Korea as well. Yemen as well. Algeria as well. Even our allies in ther SW Asia and Africa - Saudi, Kuwait, UAE, Jordan, Egypt, Pakistan - will feel a tremendous amount of pressure to crack down on terrorism, and if they do not fully cooperate, then they are in trouble as well. In short, everyone will probably be given an opportunity to renounce (and take concrete action against) terrorism and jump on our boat. For example, if Iran agrees and starts dismantling those camps and arresting everyone who had anything to do with them or Hizbollah, then they will be safe, but if they don't then they will be put on our target list and will be dealt with in the harshest terms. If these countries fail to cooperate then they will be attacked. Needless to say, Al Queda, Islamic Jihad, PFLP, DFLP, PLO, Fatah, Hizbollah, Hamas, and the like - all of the known terrorist organizations - are dead meat. We're going after all of them, not just Bin Laden and Al Queda. I hope America is ready for one hell of a war. ---------- Every nation will have to be dealt with on an individual basis, and only nations who actually aid the terrorists will be attacked. No state is aiding the IRA - no, Ireland is not helping them. We are going to help the Brits take them out now, where we used to pretty much turn a blind eye towards them. Also, the Orange Order might be in trouble, too... But that's just one example. Also, I suspect that many - if not most or all - of the nations I mentioned will end up cooperating with us. The Taliban and Iraq will not cooperate, so I'd expect to see them be erased in due time. Most everyone else is a little scared now, so I would suspect they will start dismantling their camps and arresting people as soon as we tell them to. Just IMHO, that is. ---------- Now I'm going to understate the situation a little when I say this... But in this conflict every state will be given an opportunity to side with us, and if they want to, fine, but if they don't then they will be in trouble. That is the most simplistic way I can put it. Also, there's been talk about a declaration of war, but what most people don't understand is that in such a declaration it is not necessary to specifically name individual targets, ie. Iraq, Afghanistan, etc. The actual wording will probably be something along the lines of declaring war on "terrorists everywhere who threaten the security and freedom of the world, as well as those who support them". It will be purposefully vague, because what we don't want to do in the coming fight is constrain ourselves regarding whatever actions we might have to take. We want to retain the flexibility to do whatever needs to be done. Now, I don't want anyone to think that we're going to be declaring war on multiple countries - we are not going to do that. We are going to look at groups all over the globe on a case-by-case basis, and make a judgment when we get there. Some will be attacked, while some will not. It will be a selective process. I would suspect that the insurgents in Afghanistan, for example, will not be attacked, since they don't threaten the "security and freedom" of the world... ---------- I hinted on this earlier, but now I'd like to elaborate: the Russians are about to become our best friends. There's been alot made of the fact that we don't have alot of humint on the ground (in Afghanistan). Make no mistake that when we retaliate (it's not an "if" question) that there will be ground forces involved. It's tempting to say that we can just put in some Special Forces, do the job, and leave, but that is unrealistic. It may take several weeks or even months to find Bin Laden and annihilate the entire Afghani terrorism-support network that is in place. And it might take several years to break the whole thing up. We might need help. The Russians have a wealth of information about their command structure, hiding places, materials caches, caves, etc, and also happen to have more spies in the area than we do. They've also got thousands of Speznaz who were wounded there and/or have lost buddies there and would really like to get an opportunity to take some revenge. We can even help them to pay their troops, many of which stopped recieving paychecks a long time ago... Do not be surprised if you see more than the Russians' just getting out of the way in what is about to happen. Try not to be shocked when you see Russian and American infantry actually covering each others' backs in a massive ground war. It's happened before. This is World War 3, and the Russians are going to be our best allies. And I am not overstating this. ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Again, this is from another board, but I think everyone here can figure out the context. We are engaged in a war now, and it is not going to stop even after we get Bin Laden. And anyone who gets in our way is going to regret it.
B]Manny Ramirez said: All I ever tried to say or convey is that now is not the time to get into big history lessons about the Middle East and how the US's foreign policy is what drove these sickos to create a terrifying tragedy. [/B] In another words just stop thinking and start following our government blindly. America love it or leave it etc. Such moronic patritosm led to the Vietnam debacle. Many of our fine young men of that generation learned the impact of not studying history, merely going with the passion of the moment or trusting Kissinger, McNamara and Nixon to make all the decisions. Ok, guys try to rewrite history. I'm from that generation I suspect you who are wanting blind unquestioning ahistorical obedience are not. It is the duty of all good patriots to continue to use their minds and not just be good "germans" as Ramirez suggests.[ Dvauthein and Haven don't let the hardliners shut you up!
Timing: Answering your question would require me to abandom the entire premise of my argument: that every situation must be evaluated individually, on its own merits, without prejudice or blind hatred. I can't name any circumstance, because that would require me to write a 500 page book. Our leaders have only had to make these "tough decisions" because they made mistakes that created conditions for war in the first place. World War I occurred because of military build-up and Nationalism. World War II occurred because Germany was ruined at Versailles. Viet Nam occurred because the US believed it had the right to interfere with the internal, sovereign rights of other nations. You don't understand this. It is therefore, impossible for us even to find enough common ground to argue any longer. Everything you say convinces me that you are exactly the type of person that would engulf us in World War 3, if in charge. My statements seem to convince you that I'm some sort of worthless coward. I'm putting you on ignore. This is not meant to be an insult, but rather to avoid further conflict in this time of tragedy. I wish the best for you, come what may, and would beg you to not bear grudges in this time, either.
You may not have come out and specifically said that we "got what we deserved," but you attitude of blaming our foreign policy for the actions taken aginst us does this for you. No one doubts that the US has offended people, and no says we have always been angels throughout our history. Our past is tarnished, just like every other nations. The difference is where we are today. We made an alliance with Israel and many other countries. The only major nation with which we have no major "friendly" alliance is communist China, and China has offered its full support to us in this. Doesn't this mean anything to you? Nations make alliances to ensure peace, we support our allies, and a very small number of nations are against us and our allies. World politics requires us to support our allies. I don't care if you sign up or not. That is your decision to make. The rest of us are eager for the people who did this to us to pay in such a way that NO ONE ever thinks of doing such an unspeakable act again anywhere in the world. Civilian casualties are a horrid, horrid thing. But war is hell. There is a HUGE difference in ruthlessly slaughtering thousands of innocents who were unarmed and completely unexpecting your attack, and attacking a military enemy. True Story: During the Gulf War, we were to bomb a bridge which was strategically important. US Army Psychological Operations arranged for thousands of leaflets to be dropped into the area, warning civilians to stay clear of the area to be bombed. The civilians didn't want their bridge to be destroyed, so a mass of Iraquis (bravely, I might add) crowded the bridge on the day it was to be bombed. Our choice: either abort the mission or kill a bunch of innocents. Our decision: Mission Aborted. What do you think Hussein or bin Laden would have done to us? How you can even compare us to these slimeballs is just beyond me. You said you were not nationalistic, but are patriotic in that you hold our ideals. Could of fooled me.
No I have asked you a very simple question. What situation would cause you to go to war. That's very simple to answer but obviously you don't want to answer it. You're right though, you have portrayed yourself as a worthless coward and I'm glad you've continued your chicken **** line of thinking by putting me on ignore. Good riddance.
Osama Bin Laden wated the United States to pay in such a way that they would never interfere in the Middle East again. He probably hoped his attack would be so bloody, so horrific that it would cause us to retreat in fear - That didn't work. What makes you think that our retaliation will be any more effective? Osama bin Laden needs to be brought to justice, but it must be done in such a way that we do not give rise to another hate filled man with the resources to hurt us dearly.
*sigh* Oy!! Let me see...you said "your callous implication". Umm..genius, your is a form of you and callous is an adjective. However, I guess in your mind if I said "your jackass-like behavior", I wasn't making a STATEMENT ABOUT YOU PERSONALLY. Reading comprehension, huh?? Good thing I didn't come to you for help, sherlock, before I took my ACTs and the GMAT. It's like someone said, nobody wins in a war. You are being too naive, simplistic, and idealistic here. If you honestly believe that people in Afghanistan didn't know about Bin laden and his motives then there's a bridge in Brooklyn, at least the last time I checked, that I would like to sell you. I guess if it came down to war then it's probably safe to say that we won't be able to rely on you. To me that seems to be a good thing. And I'll make sure that I check in with the "God of the BBS posting etiquette", Mr. Tolpatsch Verkinder, in posting responses and reading from now on.
Timing: Maybe you should go get a reality check, but I only see one coward here and thats you, for just shutting off beliefs that go angainst your own for no reason other than you disagree.
Treeman, Thanks for posting that information. I agree that it seems there will be a prolonged engagement that will involve some type of invasion of Iraq and Afghanistan. I would hope that when things start getting dirty that the tough talk we've heard from world leaders turns into action when it's needed.
