An excerpt from an article in the London Times. The entire article is intereting, but here it goes: EDIT: forgot the link http://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/0,,2-2001322468,00.html I was originally struck by the oddity of Muslim fundamentalists drinking at a bar the night before the attack. It's also interesting that bin Laden uses the words "personal interests." Perhaps he doesn't consider such an action pure because of the "corrupted" ways of the actors? The article gives more biography of this terrorist, and renders a distinct possibility: what if Afghanistan is telling us the truth? What if bin Laden truly is under near-house arrest? I still believe something must be done. But it would lessen the urgency of the situation considerably. Perhaps if some Pakistani, Saudi, or Jordanian troops were given a watch on bin Laden, the situation would be more palatable, and we could stop short of war. bin Laden himself is guilty of great crimes... but if this isn't Afghanistan's fault, I think an invasion is inappropriate. Now, I'm not convinced this is what happened. bin Laden remains the most likely suspect. But it is an interesting angle. And even if it doesn't change anythign (I stress I'm not sure it does), it's at least worth thinking about. How much do we want to punish the current crimes, and how much do we want to end terrorism? How far are we willing to go to achieve each objectives? Are they functionally equivalent? Or do we want to nail the bastards who did this more than, say, Auma in Japan? My personal conclusion: punish the perpetrators immediately, try to handle the rest more diplomatically... focus on prevention, not retribution in those cases, unless further attacks appear imminent.
That's just the problem - further attacks are imminent because Bin Laden believes that he is at war with the U.S. In fact, our entire way of life is an affront to his beliefs. He is willing to do anything to achieve his goal of fundamentalist Muslim rule. This makes him a far greater threat to American lives than the Communist block ever was. Religious fundamentalists like Bin Laden cannot be reasoned with. We cannot project our values and our way of thinking onto people from a completely different culture. We are left with some ugly alternatives: try to destroy him and his group, or try to cow them into inaction. Unfortunately, you can't scare someone who is willing and eager to die for his cause. I am very afraid of what may happen if we do take action to destroy him - does that spawn even more Bin Ladens? Do we really have a choice though? Inaction makes us look weak and invites more attacks. It also raises the question: how many dead Americans does it take before we realize what we are fighting against? Terrorists have killed our diplomats in our foreign embassies, our soldiers on our ships, and now our people in their workplace. They must be stopped. A world-wide war on terrorism is coming - and we had better be fighting to win it. The time for diplomacy with terrorists is over.
"These killers..., drank large amounts of vodka and possibly went to a lap-dancing club." Don't you think if you knew you were going to die soon that you would probably have a few drinks and some nookie before you bit it? They knew they were going to die and didn't care what they did (obviously)!! arghhhh rH
I guarantee that even if bin Laden wasn't the one who gave the order that he was in on the planning, which to me is good enough to end his and his assocites lives. Many of the terrorist groups work together even though they may not be in Laden's direct chain of command. But he knew about the attack even if he wasn't the one directly behind it, although I estill think he is directly behind it. Also I heard on the news that he often denies he did it, but over time he backs off and says it needed to happen.
Actually, that is a bit of a misconception. bin Laden feels that Islam has been under attack on its lands...that is all he cares about. He only wants the US out of the "Holy Land" and ruling parties such as the king of Saudi Arabia out of power (something any citizens want because they also feel it is a repressive regime). He has never said anything about spreading Islam. This all started with the Soviet Union invasion of Afghanastan. Many muslims then went to help the fight against the "godless communists." That ends in the late 80's. Then, in the early 90's, you have the US come in to deal with Iraq. his makes people such as bin Laden angry because they felt that if they dealt with the USSR, they could deal with Iraq themselves as well. Then, the fact that the US troops remained behind makes it seem like more occupation, something the regoin has had a great deal, whether it be Russians, French, etc. Unfortunately, the Gulf War came so soon after the end of the Soviet invasion, that they seem to have blended together. Note: I am not trying to defend them in any way...just state their purpose.
How much do we want to punish the current crimes, and how much do we want to end terrorism? How far are we willing to go to achieve each objectives? quote fronm Haven. That is the key question. I don't think we yet have the resolve to do it. Sure we have the resolve to sacrifice American lives and middle eastern lives. This board and the opinion polls show this. This unfortuately will be necessary, but at no where near the levels people on this board expect, unless they get into mission creep with our kids lives.. The lack of resolve is probably going to be in doing the non-military steps to do more than wipe out some current terrorist cells. Do we have the resolve to 1) pay up to $5 per gallon in gas, 2) to deficit spend or take back a trillion more in tax breaks so that we can spend on energy independence and economic development in the Middle East 3) to face down fanatical Israeli settlers 4) will our politicians merely go with the current polls showing revenge as a winning issue 5) will the pols have the guts and vision to fund a new Marshal Plan for our enemies in the Middle East? Shana in another thread said s/he feard not and I agree at least until the politicians have the guts and vision to level with the American people
First of all, Glynch is the last person to be talking about Guts, considering he ran from the Vietnam draft. Now, it is indeed going to take a lot of what we are talking about, a war on terrorism is going to be a long bloody war. Americans will die, and due to those sacrifices, we will prevail, then what? We absolutely HAVE to build these countries back up, we need to follow the lead of our grandparents, who realized that WW2 was brought on in part due to our horrible sanctions put on the German people after WW1. I don't think the politicians have to tell us anything, the information is out there, if you want to get it, then educate yourself. DaDakota
Easy for you to say DaDakota. You can talk a lot of ****, but you're at that age where you missed the Vietnam War, and you wouldn't be taken for this one.
I am a sunni muslim and we have somethings called hadis that we also are recommended to acknowledge. one of these Hadis state the order in which the sinful will enter the hell fire. the first to go will be the Maulana (islamic priests) that have changed and wrongly interpret islam because their mistakes cause many to misinterpret islam. the next to go will be Shaheed. * * a shaheed is some one who dies fighting for the cause of allah (our term for god) It is said that a shahid goes straight to heaven. So why then would they be the second to enter the hellfire? this is to punish those who readily give up their lives solely to go to heaven and not for the cause rightousness (SP?) now when fanatically looking at the concept of shaheed. These people thought this act would send them to heaven regardless of what they did, i.e. consorting, drinking, ..... killing. They failed to look at the facts that 1. Islam does not allow killing innocents, only direct threats to islam. (threats entailing lives taken of muslims) 2. Suicide sends you straight to hell. God says he gave you life when and how he chose, and he will take it. It is not our right to take our own life. ** the fact that muslims believe in the 4 holy books in their pure forms (including the Torah, Koran, and Bible) our religion is very complex and difficult to explain in one post. my request is that if you have a question about any of this please ask first, and ill try to answer the best i can.
Rocketman95, In WW2, people could join in their 40s, if and when my country calls me to duty. I am there. DaDakota
I haven't seen this mentioned anywhere yet, but it is entirely possible that Bin Laden didn't have a clue that this particular strike was being planned. That's not to say he isn't responsible. Let me explain... Bin Laden is apparently not actively involved in most of the terrorist strikes even his own organization, Al Queda, commits. He gives primarily direction and funding to his underlings - effectively, he trains them, motivates them, hands them a check and says "Now go kill some Americans for me." It is quite possible that he didn't even know this particular strike was going to happen. But it would not have happened without his support and cash. Regardless of what he knew, and even if Al Queda didn't do this one, his days are numbered.
DaDakota, why are you waiting? You sound fired up, there's no reason for you to wait on your country to call on you, you should've been down at the recruiting station Tuesday morning instead of hiding behind a computer screen. COWARD!!!
