Post #10,312
9/23/01 11:05:10 PM
|
What proof do we need against bin Laden?
Proof that he ran and financed terrorist camps?
Proof that he always warned America about two weeks before the attacks?
Proof that he is related to the leader of the Taliban?
Proof that he has made threats against America?
More proof of ties to the hijackers?
What other proof am I forgetting?
Does he have a motive? How about money? Ties to political leaders? Past problems with governments? Hmmm. Maybe he needs to be brought in for questioning? If he is innocent, he has nothing to fear. If he isn't innocent, he has lots to fear.
|
Post #10,313
9/23/01 11:20:02 PM
|
Proof for what purpose?
Hi Brett,
Powell said today that a paper will be released soon outlining the evidence against bin Laden and his organization. I would expect that allied governments will get much more detailed information than we will, at least initially.
Bin Laden has already been indicted by the US for previous terrorist attacks - the African embassy bombings, IIRC. He's strongly suspected in the USS Cole bombing in Aden as well. It's not likely he'll volunteer to be questioned by the US under such circumstances.
The same rules of evidence don't apply in prosecuting a war as in prosecuting a violation of US law. Remember that the Nuremberg trials took place after WWII, not before. Milosevic is on trial after the various Balkan wars. It's naive to think that the US has to present a legal case against bin Laden before taking actions in response to the attacks on 9/11, especially when it's likely that there won't be a hard, direct trail to him - but instead a mountain of indirect, circumstantial evidence.
That isn't to say that the US doesn't need to inform allied governments and their citizens of the evidence the US has. Of course, we need to do that. And our allies and their citizens need to be convinced of the correctness of the conclusions.
Cheers, Scott.
|
Post #10,327
9/24/01 4:53:17 AM
|
To show the world that a unilateral decision will not happen
Something the world has apparently come to expect from America.
What is more important, that we get all terrorists right away or that we conduct ourselves in a manner that respects the people of the Islamic faith?
I suggest the latter point is more critical in this battle against evil.
We need to trust that the Islam faith is about peace, not murderous Jihads. Only the radical extremists interpret murder as a way of gaining favor with Allah.
|
Post #10,352
9/24/01 11:12:55 AM
|
That's precisely what they depend on.
It takes so long to show proof and build a consensus (if one can be built at all) the perpetrators are pretty much beyond any punitive action. Right now they can depend on this, to the point they can do a cost / benefit analysis.
It's time to put a little uncertainty into their lives. A little swift, unilateral action will screw up their calculations and make ROI far more uncertain.
Ok, there's the risk we might kill some criminals that aren't the ones that actually did that particular job. I'm willing to accept that risk.
[link|http://www.aaxnet.com|AAx]
|
Post #10,367
9/24/01 12:57:17 PM
|
Re: That's precisely what they depend on.
> It's time to put a little uncertainty into their lives. A little swift, unilateral action will screw up their calculations and make ROI far more uncertain.
Like the way the TERRORISTS did to the America?
> Ok, there's the risk we might kill some criminals that aren't the ones that actually did that particular job. I'm willing to accept that risk.
Like the way the TERRORISTS did to the WTC?
And you don't see any parallelism?
Now, if you're talking an eye for an eye, that I can understand, but please don't try to claim moral high grounds/justifications for your proposed actions.
|
Post #10,375
9/24/01 1:33:54 PM
|
Morals have nothing to do with it.
Do you know why Russians were not taken hostage during the lebanon hostage season? The hezballa did in fact take a russian hostage. The KGB grabbed a couple of people out of the hezballa Area of Operations, shot one immediately, castrated another, sewed him up and dropped him off home. 1st and last Russian kidnapped in that area. You do not teach morals to snarling beast, you smack the shit out of it. Once the beast has calmed you then discourse with it. Be nice I feed you, bite me you will got to doggie heaven. thanx
why did god give us a talleywhacker and a trigger finger if he didnt want us to use them? Randy Wayne White
|
Post #10,390
9/24/01 3:49:27 PM
|
typo?
>> Do you know why Russians were not taken hostage during the lebanon hostage season? .....The KGB grabbed a couple of people out of the hezballa Area of Operations, shot one immediately, castrated another, sewed him up and dropped him off home. <<
Don't you mean "dropped *her* off home"?
However, tactics like that are one of the reasons that the Soviet Union fell: too secretive and slimey.
________________ oop.ismad.com
|
Post #10,377
9/24/01 1:41:32 PM
|
Re: That's precisely what they depend on.
> It's time to put a little uncertainty into their lives. A little swift, unilateral action will screw up their calculations and make ROI far more uncertain.
Like the way the TERRORISTS did to the America?
Not quite.
If you didn't have your head stuck up somewhere, you'd see a vast difference.
United States forces (usually) (attempt to) bend over backwards to avoid hitting civilians. Witness the constant shelling of the airport in Sarevjo - where the US forces wouldn't fire back, since it might hit people nearby.
This was a deliberate attack *using civilians as cover*.
The United States response is not to take out civilians - which would be the analog you're discussing, but the planners, financeers, leaders, and grunts of the terrorist movements.
If they'd just started carpet bombing Afganistan, Pakistan, Saudi Arabia, and the Phillipines, yes, then it would be exactly the same.
Addison
|
Post #10,441
9/24/01 7:46:59 PM
|
Re: That's precisely what they depend on.
> If they'd just started carpet bombing Afganistan, Pakistan, Saudi Arabia, and the Phillipines, yes, then it would be exactly the same. >
Addison,
I do understand what you are saying. And to a certain degree, I do CHOOSE to believe that the US will try to avert civilian casaulties as much as possible.
But (you knew there is going to be one, don't you).
Read through the earlier posts and you'll see that there are indeed posts that suggested/supported NUKING the Arab region to kingdom come.
That kind of attitude is NO different from those that you, and I condemn, and THAT is the point that you seem to choose NOT to see.
|
Post #10,534
9/26/01 8:30:43 AM
|
Re: To show the world that a unilateral decision will not ha
We need to trust that the Islam faith is about peace, not murderous Jihads. Read the Koran and say that again. Remember what Reagan said. "Trust but verify." Most of the Old Testament is not seen by the Jews as literal instructions for running their lives; they see the conquest of Canaan as a historical record and not as instructions to go out and slaughter every non-Jew occupant. The Koran, on the other hand, is seen as the literal instructions of God to his Prophet. Many of these instructions are about the treatment of infidels. "Islam is about peace" is a smokescreen. Islam converted by the sword until it could no longer muster the military power to continue to do so. Even if you buy the theory that Islam has given up its warlike nature, it is still a highly repressive and unpleasant religion even in more "secular" states such as Saudi Arabia. What I trust is that many Arabs (faithful and not-so-faithful alike) have a murderous hatred of America, based both on our lifestyle and on our support of Israel. Trusting in the peaceful nature of Islam isn't going to change that murderous hatred one bit.
Rest in peace, Jeremy, Mark, Thomas, and whoever else who helped overpower the hijackers on Flight 93.
|
Post #10,533
9/26/01 8:17:53 AM
|
Powell has been running off at the mouth a lot
And he's been regularly contradicting and restating the administration's speeches.
On some occasions, such as this "documentation" one, Bush flat-out said most of the information was classified.
Colin Powell, do your country a service and resign now, before your mouth flips and flops its way into saying something that forces Bush to fire you.
Rest in peace, Jeremy, Mark, Thomas, and whoever else who helped overpower the hijackers on Flight 93.
|
Post #10,571
9/26/01 1:28:28 PM
|
Rather not, IMO
Powell is an interesting character, an awfully doveish hawk. His background is 100% military, but he has a very strong preference for exploring diplomatic avenues. Make no mistake: when he feels a military action is required, his call will be for a fully supported, unrestrained (though likely focussed) strike. If you haven't already read his autobiography, do.
The rest of the Bush administration has struck me as far less polished. We started off this team by stepping all over our friends' feet: the South Korean president, who was pretty much hung out to dry WRT North Korean negotiations; the entire world WRT Kyoto Accords; our Peruvian partners in SoAm drug interdiction when we were party to the Peruvian AF flight that shot down a missionary's plane, killing the missionary's wife and child. The China spyplane saga -- not that I feel the US was in the wrong on that incident, but the handling of our relationship with China was wildly out of control.
Several news sources have noted that the Administration still hasn't managed to coordinate its story WRT the message it wants to project. I sincerely doubt Powell can be called to task for this. In fact, he's cleaned up the mess left by prior Presidential misstatements -- you recall the phase that the US would "Destroy those" who supported terrorism? That was backpedaled significantly.
The current bin Laden evidence story has been evolving. I don't think Powell's to blame for that.
-- Karsten M. Self [link|mailto:kmself@ix.netcom.com|kmself@ix.netcom.com] What part of "gestalt" don't you understand?
|
Post #10,314
9/24/01 12:25:16 AM
|
Proof? Why don't we just take him at his word?
If we wait for "proof" that'll stand up in a U.S. court of law, we aren't going to be able to get that on anyone in time to do any good. They'll have blown themselves up along with the Chicago Mercantile Exchange by then.
Listen, we've been attacked. Thousands of innocent people have been killed. Anyone who tells us he did it, wants to do it or favors doing it should expect us to take him very seriously. Once words have resulted in action, then taking action against those words is fully appropriate.
[link|http://www.aaxnet.com|AAx]
|
Post #10,328
9/24/01 6:57:42 AM
|
No proof will persuade the Arab/Muslim street
I don't think any proof that the US offers will persuade the Arab/Muslim street. The theory in Pkistan and other Arab countries is that the Jews did it. [link|http://www.boston.com/dailyglobe2/266/nation/Improbable_theories_have_wide_acceptance+.shtml|http://www.boston.c...tance+.shtml] Here are some relevant quotes: "Just before dawn on Sept. 11, so the story goes, 4,000 Jews working in the World Trade Center literally got a wake-up call from agents of Mossad, the Israeli spy agency. Or maybe it was the CIA. Or perhaps some shadowy cabal of international bankers and American arms manufacturers. Versions vary, except on the curious (an unexplained) number: Precisely 4,000 people - all Jews - are said to have received the life-saving tip-off. What makes such a preposterous tale seem a horrifying metaphor for the estrangement of Muslim and Western societies is the calm and matter-of-fact way it is related by people from every walk of life. ... The hottest theory in Pakistan these days is that either the Israeli government or a secret society of American Jews engineered the bloody attacks. ... From the view of proof, these stories about bin Laden seem nothing more than claims by your President Bush, he said. I don't give them any more, or less, credence than I give the stories about Jewish involvement."
|
Post #10,341
9/24/01 10:21:12 AM
|
Regarding this rumor
Do you really think 4000 people working in the WTC would not tip off authorities about such a heinous crime? You really think they would allow 50,000 of their NY friends to get murdered without a hint of conscience?
No. I don't buy this rumor. It looks like Al Queda propoganda to me. They do publish a bi-monthly newsletter along with their TV program.
|
Post #10,344
9/24/01 10:35:00 AM
|
Um. Brett?
That's what Bluke was saying.
Its preposterous.
But, then again, the Protocols of the Learned Elders of Zion was a forgery, and yet there are people still today (when its been proven to be a forgery) who swear that they're the truth.
No. I don't buy this rumor.
*YOU* aren't supposed to, or rather, they don't care about you.
They care about the great masses of Arab/Muslims, those are the ones who won't doubt it to the degree you and I would.
Addison
|
Post #10,346
9/24/01 10:43:34 AM
|
I see your point.
My initial reaction was, if it's preposperous why spread it as a possibility?
Now I realize that Bluke was merely pointing out more indicators to the terrorist's propoganda machine in action. Osama supposedley just sent a fax to CNN telling his Pakistan neighbors to get their Jihad against America started.
The Taliban also came out with a similar statement today.
Evil propoganda is now in full force. Point well taken.
|
Post #10,385
9/24/01 3:29:00 PM
|
Re: No proof will persuade the Arab/Muslim street
Well, on the "60 Minutes" program last night (2001/9/24), publishers of the major Arab newspapers in Cairo said as much as they wish it wasn't true, they do believe that it was Arabs that did the 9/11 deeds.
I have trouble giving the slightest creadance to the rumor about the early warning for Jews. I'm sure a simple statistical test, based on WTC casualties, can be made to verify the likelihood of anything like that.
On the other hand, if the question was did the Mossad have any idea what the al Qaeda plan was for that day and did they withhold that information, that's something else. On 9/11, and since I have asked myself the question "Who has benefited from this?". Well, besides the few terrorists that well executed a plan for Allah, glory and perhaps mythical virgins, the true and major beneficiary has been Israel. The Palestinians may have been dancing in the streets, but the Israelis were dancing in their hearts. I could sense the glee in even you in the way you interacted with Andrew and others who talked about nuking the Afghans. Yes, the US will now lead Western World in eradicating Arab terrorists and maybe more for good measure. Others fighting Israel's war. I don't know how good the Mossad is. They certainly are able to tell the time place and place of the political assassination targets. They certainly have had their spies in the US defense department. I've heard that, over the years, the Palestinians have killed 700 of their own as Israeli spies. Some probably really were. Who knows how many Israeli spies there are and where they are now. With Netanyahu testifying before the US Congress and the mayor of Jerusalem at "ground zero" and on CNN last week, they are working some plan to milk the situation. Anyway, I have my doubts about Israel.
We, Americans, need to collect the living bastards that made the dirty deed possible, try them, and execute them. We also need to figure out what made it possible and work, within Constitutional bounds, towards make it impossible.
Alex
Whom the gods destroy, they first make mad. -- Euripides
|
Post #10,450
9/25/01 2:23:19 AM
9/25/01 2:35:02 AM
|
Actually if anything Israel has come out much worse...
from all of this. The Foreign Secretary of Britain basically blamed the attack on Israel's policies in the Middle East, and countries like Iran, Syria etc. are now being rehabilitated to serve in the coalition. Now there is much more pressure on Israel to make concessions so that the US can get Arab support. My feeling is that Israel is going to be sacrificed so that Bush can get the Arabs in his coalition, just like in the Gulf War when Iraq fired missiles at Israel and the US exerted tremendous pressure on Israel not to respond.
Edited by bluke
Sept. 25, 2001, 02:35:02 AM EDT
|