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

[Saxon]

Gritsucker,

To reply to your core points, you point to a waste of tax payers’ money. It seems to me that you are going to spend 40 billion on this project one way or another. If my way will stop the terrorism and leave a nation with schools, hospitals and good will to the US, is it a bigger waste of money that 40 billion of bombs and an angry state of ten year olds waiting to grow up and avenge daddy?

Geoschmo has some good points, the Marshal Plan worked for many reasons, not just straight cash. However, the essence of the project was “Ok Germany, you made a big mess of things, now we are going to fix it up for you and foot the bill.” This “Carebear approach” has as a result, the US gaining widespread respect from the Germans of that generation and a nice, stable, healthy ally in Central Europe. Compare that to, as I said earlier, the response of the German nation to the punishment of the Versailles Treaty.

Both you and I have advocated for the violent removal of the leadership of terrorist Groups, but I am presenting an idea of what we should do to the rest of the people, so that we don’t have another terrorist attack in ten or twenty years. You are right, the US should do something to make the world a better place. However, you need to be a bit careful how you do it.

Right now, the US is in a frenzy. I am a sub-contractor to State Department and the email I get from them shows a government jumping at slammed doors and fearing it’s own shadow. Everyone wants vengeance. I hear you. So does the rest of the world. But, how you do it is going to have a big impact on how we look at you afterwards. You say you have the right to retaliate and I will not argue with you. What I will say is that you also have an obligation, as a member of the community of nations, to check in and listen to the rest of the world. And you have an obligation to try and make it a better world, not just one that leads to more terrorists later.

To put my colours on my sleeve, I have a dead friend, a Kenyan, who died in the Nairobi Embassy bombing in 98. When I visit her husband and talk to the teenage kids, I remember their mom. I also have a friend who can’t walk straight due to that bomb, a wall fell on him, crushing his leg. A lady I don’t get along with, but who I have to talk to on the phone every day, was blinded by the bomb, but was put back together in a US military hospital in Germany. The vacuum caused by the bomb sucked all the glass out of her monitor and into her face. I remember that when I see the glasses she wears now. I can, and do, intimately share the pain of those who have lost friends and family in New York. I have lived with the results of Bin Laden’s handiwork for over two years now and want to see him dead.

So take a couple of steps back and have a look at what I am talking about. I am looking for a long term solution which hits at some of the root causes of terrorism. I have also put it in a way which, I hope, didn’t offend too many people, even if they disagreed with it. As such, I am taken aback that you have to refer to it as a “****ed up idea.” Don’t like it? That is ok. Just try and say it in a decent way, as we both have the right to hold our views.

[dogscoff]

Just seen th front of this morning's Sun (One of the UK's more ignorant tabloid papers).

Pictures of troops with the headline "Bin loadin' for Bin Laden". Joy. This is the same "news"paper that came up with "Clobba Slobba" {ie Milosovich) a few years back.

Any war can be justified as long as we have a catchy pun for it. I don't think people realise just how hard to invade Afghanistan is. Just ask the Russians...

------------------
SE4 Code:
L GdY $ Fr- C- Sd T!+ Sf-- Tcp-- A% M>M+ MpD! RV Pw Fq+ Nd- Rp+ G-
/SE4 Code
Go to my meagre SEIV pages to generate your own code.

[geoschmo]

quote:

---

Originally posted by dogscoff:
I don't think people realise just how hard to invade Afghanistan is. Just ask the Russians...

---

...or the British before them.

The only invaders that had any amount of success in Afghanistan were the Mongols, and they were pretty much just passing through on their way to pillage the rest of Asia and Europe.

Geo

[disabled]

I do think Alexander the Great has succcess on his plow to India (that ended in pakistan).


Either way, we should remove all threats to this nation & others and apply the marshall plan. We screwed up big time during the cold war when we dropped the plan. Most of the dictators in power right now are because of the US. Often the US will help a country, but the faction we help would want to turn socialist for a while to rebuild thier cities, then we turn around and install a dictator that hates us.

We need to get the Marshall Plan back into effect. The US can foot the bill for building up countries plus think of the jobs and work it would create in the economy.


The only true weapon against War and Terror is Building and Education

------------------
HADRIAN T. AVENTINE
admin@spaceempires.org
Administrator | SpaceEmpires.org

[dmm]

quote:

---

Originally posted by Hadrian Aventine:
The only true weapon against War and Terror is Building and Education

---

Total destruction of any nation that dares oppose us in anything would also work quite well. Afghanistan has already had 4 years of drought. Famine and disease are both time-honored weapons of mass destruction. Close all borders, destroy all access roads, no one and nothing goes in or out. Burn the crops, bomb the wells, shoot the cattle, then sit back and wait. A year from now, the territory can be divided among the surrounding countries and repopulated. No nukes necessary. Draconian? Yes, but we'd only have to do this once.

As you can see from my Last few Posts, I am, like many Americans, somewhat schizophrenic right now. The terrorists had better hope that they haven't pushed us over the edge.

[Baron Munchausen]

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]

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