Post #42,438
6/15/02 6:02:56 PM
|
So you are saying . .
. . we should ignore the sovereignty of any nation that contains within it what we think is a terrorist training camp, despite what they (and anyone else) may think that camp is, in violation of the wishes (airspace and defense forces) of that nation. The thing is, just about anywhere you put a training camp, it's going to be within the borders of one country or another.
Given our intelligence departments' excellent track record for selecting targets we should soon be reading about it in the newspaper.
"Department of Defense confirms smart bombing of Boy Scout encampment in Morocco".
"Bush defends military strike, 'Boy Scout training would be excellent preparation for terrorist action - we must consider this a preemptive strike'".
[link|http://www.aaxnet.com|AAx]
|
Post #42,444
6/15/02 8:28:48 PM
|
LRPD approves? "Ahead two thirds!"_________:-\ufffd
|
Post #42,455
6/16/02 9:45:24 AM
|
Well we could start by praising Allah
and make a nice glass design at medina and mecca, maybe then they will see the light. If ya work it right you could have a tape saying the bin laden has blessed the work and Iranians carried the load. We have lost the spirit of Bill donovan Im afraid while retaining the worst aspects of Dulles.
thanx,
bill
TAM ARIS QUAM ARMIPOTENS
|
Post #42,477
6/16/02 3:24:33 PM
|
Well . . . its a start . .
Slagging Mecca and Medina, and dynamiting the Dome of the Rock (packing surviving peices of the rock into barrels of pig grease) is a good start . . IF - you want to commit to eternal enmity with, and total destruction of, an entire religion - in this case, a very large and widespread religion with plenty of adherants at all levels of our economic and political structure.
The problem here is that you have to be fully committed to the follow-through. Additional problems are that this goes directly against the Constitutional guarantee of freedom of religion, and also involves certain practical and logistic problems.
I find it very difficult to recommend this course of action.
That's not to say it won't happen, though. A dirty nuke set off in DisneyLand on the 4th of July would probably just about do the trick. A logical next step would be to occupy Saudi Arabia, the depopulation of which would not be a really big job, and it'd be a dandy logistic staging base.
[link|http://www.aaxnet.com|AAx]
|
Post #42,492
6/16/02 5:05:33 PM
|
What I am saying
is to get the terrorists before they do the bombings and attacks. Use intelligence to find out where their camps and bases are and get the cooperation of the governments to verify the terrorist locations, and then attack the terrorist camps and hideouts. If they are not going to turn over the terrorists, the least they can do is point out the terrorists camps and hideouts and let us come in a clean them out.
Or would you rather we wait until they have the attack planned and try to stop it before it happens? Yeah, catch a dozen of them at a time, and have the possibility of not stopping the attacks.
I am free now, to choose my own destiny.
|
Post #42,496
6/16/02 5:17:47 PM
|
So we get to go in and clean them out . .
deep within someone else's territory, in a country that is deeply divided as to whether they are "terrorists" or "freedom fighters".
What are the chances of even our alies (if any) allowing that, never mind a hostile government, like, say France?
[link|http://www.aaxnet.com|AAx]
|
Post #42,500
6/16/02 5:35:54 PM
|
Better than
expecting the governments to clean their own mess, and allowing terrorists to get so far as to do the attacks before we can catch them.
No wonder the CIA and FBI sat on their thumbs after being warned of Hijacked Airplane attacks? Too much beurocracy!
I am free now, to choose my own destiny.
|
Post #42,503
6/16/02 5:46:15 PM
|
They can be both.
After all, we trained Osama back when we needed them to fight against the Russian invaders.
When they're trying to drive out the "heathens", do they distinguish between the "good" heathens (us) and the "bad" heathens (the russians)?
What would the US have said if it had been a Russian building that they had flown into and it had been back during the Russian invasion of Afghanistan?
|
Post #42,521
6/16/02 8:50:31 PM
|
Interesting points
I just don't have the answers for them.
#1 Osama, like many others, seemed at the time to be the lessor of two evils. Now, like Noreaga and the rest, he must be stopped.
#2 Again the lessor of two evils, the good heathens (US) helped to get rid of the bad heathens (USSR). But now they see the good heathens as the bad heathens?
#3 Terrorism should not be condoned at any cost.
Oh yeah, what part of "OUR WORDS ARE BACKED WITH NUCLEAR WEAPONS!" did they not understand? :)
I am free now, to choose my own destiny.
|
Post #42,525
6/16/02 10:06:07 PM
|
Counter points.
#1 Osama, like many others, seemed at the time to be the lessor of two evils. Now, like Noreaga and the rest, he must be stopped. We, as a nation, need to STOP looking at things like that. Again, I think this gets back to our dependance upon mid-eastern oil. If we aren't supporting a free democracy, we're violating the principles our country is based upon. #2 Again the lessor of two evils, the good heathens (US) helped to get rid of the bad heathens (USSR). But now they see the good heathens as the bad heathens? Nope, we're all heathens. If they can use one group of heathens while fighting another group of heathens, that's okay. As long as they keep focused on getting ALL the heathens out. We aren't "good" in any way except we will supply money, training and weapons (which can then be used against us). #3 Terrorism should not be condoned at any cost. But is it "terrorism" to them? Look at your own next statement. Oh yeah, what part of "OUR WORDS ARE BACKED WITH NUCLEAR WEAPONS!" did they not understand? :) Nukes do NOT specifically target military or terrorists or repressive regimes. They kill EVERYONE. So, what's the difference between us killing civilians indiscriminately and their killing civilians indiscriminately? That's why I keep saying that if we REALLY WANT to end terrorism, we have to target SPECIFIC individuals. We cannot kill innocents, call them "collateral damage" and say we are fighting terrorism. Well, we can say it, but that doesn't make it the truth.
|
Post #42,582
6/17/02 9:42:03 AM
|
Of course...
if we kill civilians indiscriminitely - it's terrorism.
if we kill specific individuals - it's death squads.
if we capture, try and prosecute specific individuals - it's called being soft on terrorism.
|
Post #42,763
6/18/02 1:05:38 PM
|
I don't see what all the fuss is about
The Feds were able to take out Ruby Ridge and the Branch Davidians and that Cubian boy before things got worse, why not treat the terrorists the same way? Of course the Ruby Ridge and Branch Davidian people got killed in the process, or most of them anyway. Where are the killa/thrilla *ss whooping Federal Agents when you need them to take out the terrorists?
I am free now, to choose my own destiny.
|
Post #42,858
6/19/02 3:22:14 AM
|
You're right.
You don't see what the fuss is about. You're also right about how simple it would be to 'solve' (meaning win) the problem - if it happened to be the sanitized one in the cartoon.
Unfortunately the cartoon version just may be the one which is addressed, given the oratory about Good and Evil and the recent plans to develop new 'small nukes': a decision which presupposes that we are willing to use them, in scenarios already contemplated.
Then you can talk about real 'fuss'
Ashton
|
Post #42,900
6/19/02 3:12:21 PM
|
The alternative is then
to allow them to train, allow them to make the bombs, and then allow them to make the plans, and then come into our country and then we nail them, hopefully, before they do damage. It may work that way in "G.I. Joe" but not in the real world.
I am free now, to choose my own destiny.
|
Post #42,912
6/19/02 4:48:15 PM
|
Only for those who cannot grasp what a
"complex issue" entails (what the words mean), and will settle for digital Yes/No slogans instead, every time. You want simple?
Kill All Heathen Muslims for Christ, Capitalism and The American Way\ufffd. From this: you can easily open that [Permission to Fire] interlock and Simplify all issues you dare not face (for all the contradictions within the juvenile rote-thinking about them) to:
That "concave surface of radioactive glass" - so fondly-mouthed an Ideal Solution, in the minds of the -what?- People of Certainty?
Here's another pair for you to parse:
Arbeit Macht Frei!
AND
Might Makes Right.
never mind..
|
Post #42,929
6/19/02 6:57:39 PM
|
Complex Issue
Below is the definition of both words: [link|http://www.dictionary.com/search?q=complex|[link|http://www.dictionary.com/search?q=complex|http://www.dictiona...ch?q=complex]]
com\ufffdplex (km-plks, kmplks)
adj.
Consisting of interconnected or interwoven parts; composite.
Composed of two or more units: a complex carbohydrate.
Involved or intricate, as in structure; complicated.
Grammar.
Consisting of at least one bound form. Used of a word.
Consisting of an independent clause and at least one other independent or dependent clause. Used of a sentence.
n. (kmplks)
A whole composed of interconnected or interwoven parts: a complex of cities and suburbs; the military-industrial complex.
In psychology, a group of related, often repressed ideas and impulses that compel characteristic or habitual patterns of thought, feelings, and behavior. No longer in scientific use.
An exaggerated or obsessive concern or fear.
Medicine. The combination of factors, symptoms, or signs of a disease or disorder that forms a syndrome.
[link|http://www.dictionary.com/search?q=issues|[link|http://www.dictionary.com/search?q=issues|http://www.dictiona...rch?q=issues]]
is\ufffdsue (sh)
n.
The act or an instance of flowing, passing, or giving out.
The act of circulating, distributing, or publishing by an office or official group: government issue of new bonds.
Something produced, published, or offered, as:
An item or set of items, as stamps or coins, made available at one time by an office or bureau.
A single copy of a periodical: the May issue of the magazine.
A distinct set of copies of an edition of a book distinguished from others of that edition by variations in the printed matter.
A final result or conclusion, as a solution to a problem.
Proceeds from estates or fines.
Something proceeding from a specified source: suspicions that were the issue of a deranged mind.
Offspring; progeny: died without issue.
A point or matter of discussion, debate, or dispute: legal and moral issues.
A matter of public concern: debated economic issues.
A misgiving, objection, or complaint: had issues with the plan to change the curriculum.
The essential point; crux: the issue of how to provide adequate child care.
A culminating point leading to a decision: bring a case to an issue.
Informal. A personal problem or emotional disorder: The teacher discussed the child's issues with his parents.
A place of egress; an outlet: a lake with no issue to the sea.
Pathology.
A discharge, as of blood or pus.
A lesion, wound, or ulcer producing such a discharge.
Archaic. Termination; close.
v. is\ufffdsued, is\ufffdsu\ufffding, is\ufffdsues
v. intr.
To go or come out. See Synonyms at appear.
To accrue as proceeds or profit: Little money issued from the stocks.
To be born or be descended.
To be circulated or published.
To spring or proceed from a source. See Synonyms at stem1.
To terminate or result.
v. tr.
To cause to flow out; emit.
To circulate or distribute in an official capacity: issued uniforms to the players.
To publish: issued periodic statements.
Idioms:
at issue
In question; in dispute: \ufffdMany people fail to grasp what is really at issue here\ufffd (Gail Sheehy).
At variance; in disagreement.
join issue
To enter into controversy.
Law To submit an issue for decision.
take issue
To take an opposing point of view; disagree.
In what part of the definition means we cannot deal with the complex issues by taking out the root cause? Take out the leaders, and the followers will crumble. Find the leaders of the terrorists, get the goods on them, capture or kill them, and then the followers get low morale and ungroup.
I am free now, to choose my own destiny.
|
Post #42,910
6/19/02 4:40:07 PM
|
I know I am right!
They just recently captured a few people they believe to be some of the leaders behind the 9/11 attacks. The bulk of the terrorists are just followers, sheep, we need to go after the shepards that are training the sheep to give up their lives to kill what they believe is the "enemy" or "heathens". We need to capture the leaders or kill them, either way, and then we can prevent some or maybe most of the attacks.
I am free now, to choose my own destiny.
|
