So Zenster,
Would you advocate me being killed as collateral damage if the IRA detonated a bomb in the US?
Moderator’s Notes: I think it is well past time to move this thread to Great Debates. Everyone please continue holding your anger in check. You guys have done an admirable job to this point for such a contentious topic.
Zenster -
I share your grief, your pain, and your anger at what has happened. I am saddened by what I see happening to the people around me for I have seen more hatred for my fellow man than I can bear. This hatred is irrational, borne out of a desire for revenge.
Only by bringing ourselves to hate a people could we ever entertain the thought of their destruction, only by dehumanizing them can we justify something as horrible as war. This is what the terrorists had to do before they perpetrated their atrocity on the people of America.
The blood on their hands isn’t only that of Americans, the sons and daughters of many nations were murdered on Tuesday and we have counted our own among the dead. This was an attack on all of us.
I want to respect you as I once did but I find that difficult right now. If what you propose comes to pass then many innocent people will be killed and that blood will be on our hands.
Those that would survive such an attack woud surely hate us with an unbridled passion. They would then have every reason to declare Jihad upon us for it will have been us who invaded their lands and murdered their sons and daughters. They would not look upon us as people like them but as monsters. They would have justification to exact revenge at every opportunity.
The propoganda that they have been taught would no longer be propoganda. We would make their lies into the truth.
We cannot let that happen. We must not become that which we despise.
My point – which you apparently missed all together – is that maybe if the United States stopped pissing off the Arabs and the Muslems and most everyone else in that region, they’ll stop calling us “The Great Satan” and sending suicidal terrorists after us.
The terrorists aren’t attacking us because there wasn’t anything good on TV last week; they’re getting revenge for what they perceive as past crimes committed by the US. Unless we start building diplomatic bridges and stop doing questionable/objectionable things, we’re just going to get more grief sooner or later.
If binLaden is found responsible for these particular acts of terrorism, arresting him and his abettors should be a goal unto itself. If stopping terrorism is a byproduct of this-- good. If not, then so be it. I do not disagree with you that US foreign policy in the Middle East has been pretty bad and misguided at times. What I was disagreeing with is the idea that the US had this coming to them because of bad policy.
Since the US (and France and Columbia and Switzerland and Istanbul and every other nation on the planet) has not come up with a viable alternative energy source, it is imperative that the oil in the Middle East continue to flow as unhampered as possible. This is in America’s best interest. It is in the best interest of the whole world, as a matter of fact.
**
[/QUOTE]
The terrorists aren’t attacking us because there wasn’t anything good on TV last week; they’re getting revenge for what they perceive as past crimes committed by the US. Unless we start building diplomatic bridges and stop doing questionable/objectionable things, we’re just going to get more grief sooner or later. **
[/QUOTE]
Sorry, I don’t buy the “It’s our fault” theory. It that’s true, why are there El Salvadoran suicide bombers lining up to come here? We’ve been meddling in Central America for damn near 200 years now, and doing worse things to them than we ever did in the Middle East. If the “rag-heads” are willing to die in strikes against us, it’s because their religious and political leaders have whipped them up into a frenzy to increase their own power.
Just for the record. I completely and totally disagree with the notion that the terrorists hate us because of our own unethical actions.
You wanna know what really makes OBL mad? That American troops are stationed in Saudi Arabia, defiling the homeland of Islam. The only way we could placate him would be to withdraw completely from Saudi Arabia. But, are we there unethically? Did we invade Saudi Arabia? No, we were invited there by the Saudi government because they needed help against Iraq.
If you think we should “shouldn’t stick our noses” in, then we should withdraw. Which could easily lead to an invasion of Saudi Arabia by Iraq. That invasion seems far-fetched and ridiculous now…because we have American troops there, we sell billions of dollars worth of arms to the Saudis, and we crushed Iraq’s army during the Gulf War.
So…without US “meddling”, Iraq conquers the Saudis.
See, withdrawl from the Middle East has consequences. Thousands, maybe millions of people will die if we do. I suppose we might comfort ourselves that we are not responsible for those deaths. But we will be (at least to some extent), because we could have prevented them.
And we haven’t even mentioned what would happen if we stopped supporting Israel. If we stop supporting Israel, then we are standing aside and allowing the completion of Hitler’s dream. Perhaps you feel comfortable about that.
By it’s nature, the US is a cosmopolitan, open society. We will always be involved in some fashion everywhere in the world. Culturally, economially, religiously, politically. We are not going to suddenly stop trading with the rest of the world. We are not going to stop making movies, TV shows, magazines, and websites that horrify and enrage the fanatics.
We cannot appease the fanatics without becoming an isolationist third world country. That is what they hope for us, that we will retreat, our economy will collapse, that they will be able to pursue their bloody goals free from interference from decadent infidels. We cannot give them what they want without cutting our own throats.
So, the premise of negotiation fails. We cannot give them what they want, they refuse to give us what we want. So we must have conflict. There is no escaping it. Perhaps in several generations we will be successful in westernizing, democratizing, and opening their society so much that they cease to be threatened by us and instead want to join us. And that is perhaps the only way that we can win the “war”. By exporting our culture, our economic systems, our political organizations. To paraphrase Kruschev, we will sell them the rope with which they will hang themselves.
Of course the United States and the other Western countries are not perfect. But we must get over the idea that if only we behaved ethically everyone would love us. In fact, improving our ethical behavior is more likely to make people hate us rather than love us.
I don’t think the extremists in the Arab world consider us “the Great Satan” solely because of what some perceive as our “meddling” in Middle Eastern affairs.
Our very way of life is anathema to them. We seem to be looked upon as morally corrupt simply due to the way we live our everyday lives. The freedoms we enjoy in this country
are a direct threat to them and are leading the world down the path to destruction, in their view.
Also, I don’t really understand how any of us can really know what the “average” Afghani thinks or feels at this point. Could be that they’re simply struggling to survive, just as they might be frothing at the mouth to see more American blood spilled.
In response to the comments related to sympathy for the ordinary civilians of Afghan…
Please remember that the majority of Germans were not members of the Nazi party. The Afghan government and others like it, allow, condone and harbor terrorist and terrorist activity. These governments must be brought down, or what happened on Tuesday will certainly happen again, maybe not here in our country but maybe somewhere else.
We cannot sit idly by and hope it doesn’t happen again. We must take action. Wide pervasive action.
[quote]
Deputy Defense Secretary Paul Wolfowitz, 9/14/01
One has to say it’s not just simply a matter of capturing people and holding them accountable, but removing the sanctuaries, removing the support systems, ending states who sponsor terrorism.
The people who continue to accuse me of wanting genocide are really off base. I do not advocate the persecution of Afghani people as some undesirable cultural element. I do not advocate their demise because of religious differences. I advocate a retaliation against their nation and people because it is they who have made a home for the people responsible for the atrocity that happened in New York.
Governments consist not only of politicians, but of the people who support them, either through outright participation or through the contribution of tax money to finance that government. In order to send the correct message to the Taliban government in Afghanistan, it is necessary to begin a campaign of eliminating both the government and the populace that provides the backing for that government.
I am speaking in simple military equations. The flowery speech of diplomats has gotten us nowhere and we have paid a terrible price for our dalliance. There needs to be an ongoing war against all terrorist nations and their supporters. The small action I suggest in Afghanistan will go a long way towards convincing the world community of terrorist supporters that the United States will not be ignored and that there is a price to pay for noncompliance.
Anyone who wishes to call me a racist should feel free to join O.J.'s defense team. Anyone who wishes to accuse me of genocide needs to read some books on warfare and how battles are fought. I do not see where I have gone out of my way to insult anyone here except for BigGirl who was thoughtless enough to call me racist and attribute to me the most reprehensible sort of public conduct. For her, I reserve a hearty rigid digit. For all others, I respect your differences of opinion and am glad to see that there is a multitude of voices in this debate.
The simple prosecution of Osama bin Laden poses no solution whatsoever to the problem at hand. A strong demonstration of force is needed to quell any further attempts at such horrors. I would even add that had an IRA group perpetrated such an atrocity here, I would do exactly what I first recommended. I would have the town of their origin evacuated and then bombed flat as a reminder that having terrorists in your midst is just not the smartest thing that you can do.
I would certainly appreciate being shown where I have been so insulting to other posters in this thread. Likewise, I also have a difficult time accepting the criticisms of so many who seem to imply that I have stepped outside of my (what are hoped to be) typically laudable opinions. I see very few of those who claim this as having ever showed up and vocally supporting me in any other forums previously around here, such that your current shouts of dismay carry little weight with me right now.
The people who continue to accuse me of wanting genocide are really off base. I do not advocate the persecution of Afghani people as some undesirable cultural element. I do not advocate their demise because of religious differences. I advocate a retaliation against their nation and people because it is they who have made a home for the people responsible for the atrocity that happened in New York.
Governments consist not only of politicians, but of the people who support them, either through outright participation or through the contribution of tax money to finance that government. In order to send the correct message to the Taliban government in Afghanistan, it is necessary to begin a campaign of eliminating both the government and the populace that provides the backing for that government.
I am speaking in simple military equations. The flowery speech of diplomats has gotten us nowhere and we have paid a terrible price for our dalliance. There needs to be an ongoing war against all terrorist nations and their supporters. The small action I suggest in Afghanistan will go a long way towards convincing the world community of terrorist supporters that the United States will not be ignored and that there is a price to pay for noncompliance.
Anyone who wishes to call me a racist should feel free to join O.J.'s defense team. Anyone who wishes to accuse me of genocide needs to read some books on warfare and how battles are fought. I do not see where I have gone out of my way to insult anyone here except for BigGirl who was thoughtless enough to call me racist and attribute to me the most reprehensible sort of public conduct. For her, I reserve a hearty rigid digit. For all others, I respect your differences of opinion and am glad to see that there is a multitude of voices in this debate.
The simple prosecution of Osama bin Laden poses no solution whatsoever to the problem at hand. A strong demonstration of force is needed to quell any further attempts at such horrors. I would even add that had an IRA group perpetrated such an atrocity here, I would do exactly what I first recommended. I would have the town of their origin evacuated and then bombed flat as a reminder that having terrorists in your midst is just not the smartest thing that you can do.
I would certainly appreciate being shown where I have been so insulting to other posters in this thread. Likewise, I also have a difficult time accepting the criticisms of so many who seem to imply that I have stepped outside of my (what are hoped to be) typically laudable opinions. I see very few of those who claim this as having ever showed up and vocally supporting me in any other forums previously around here, such that your current shouts of dismay carry little weight with me right now.
I agree that the Taliban have harboured and maybe even abetted, bin Laden, and for that alone they should be punished. By all means, take out the ruling government in Afganistan. I accept that military and government installations will be bombed.
But the average Afgani citizen isn’t in the position to make any decision about what their government does. They don’t have freedom of speech, they don’t have television, radio, the internet. They are a severely oppressed people. They aren’t pouring their tax money to finance their governemnt – they don’t have any money! The average Afgani citizen shouldn’t be the target. That won’t teach the government any lessons, it will only serve to reinforce the constant fear these people live in as they will have yet another people gunning for them.
This is where I believe you are mistaken. The populace of Afganistan are so oppressed and downtrodden they are providing the backing for the government. The Taliban merely stands on their backs.
Most of the citizens of Afganistan have known nothing but fear and death and abuse by various warring factions that go in and out of power. To suggest that we punish them further simply because they didn’t have the resources to help themselves is wrong.
I agree that prosecuting, and even executing, bin Laden will solve nothing in the long term. But do you honestly think that bombing civilian towns will do any good? bin Laden won’t give a damn, I’m sure, except in that it will further his own cause and give him justification for his actions. You think that the people of these towns have any say in who they have in their midsts?
Besides, bin Laden isn’t from Afganistan, he has no ‘town of origin’ located in that country. Should we start bombing Saudi Arabia too?
I haven’t made any of the claims above so I am not replying to this paragraph.
That’s simply preposterous. By that logic, the average Soviet citizen was culpable for the actions of Stalin, despite the fact that they could have (and often were) murdered by him at any given time. It also makes the average American culpable for the actions of Nixon.
Do you even know anything about Afghanistan? Let me give you some clues from the CIA World Factbook, with some bolding added:
To recognize that we will probably need to take military action against the Taliban in Afghanistan, and that this will probably result in widespread noncombatant casualties that we should nevertheless do our utmost to minimize, is simply facing reality. To call for the deliberate decimation of the civilian population of Afghanistan, composed of poor, illiterate, destitute farmers who have neither the will nor the means to defeat the warring factions in their country even if they wanted to, is monstrous evil.
The above is, of course, what I meant to say.
And thank you pldennison for saying what I tried to say so much better than I ever could. There was a reason I never posted to GD before Uncle Beer moved this thread.
Well, I haven’t.
Haven’t done that, either. And yes, I realized you weren’t accusing me, per se. But I just want to make that clear. What I have said is that this…
…is horribly misapplied, when you’re talking about Afghanistan. If you’re comparing this nation to the U.S., you’re comparing apples and oranges. Given that, this…
…is utterly inappropriate and unwarranted. Never mind that from a moral standpoint I think it is unsupportable. I’m saying that from a logic standpoint, that it’s a flawed argument. Further, I am personally of the opinion that this…
…is incorrect as well. I don’t think anyone ignores the U.S. now and I am of the strong opinion that this…
…in the sense that you are advocating, will not only not work, it will make things far, far worse.
I am all for seeking to destroy the terrorist factions, and, if they prove intransigient, the core of the Taliban as well. But extending that war to the civilian population just to make a point, will multiply anti-U.S. hatred a thousand-fold. You will not be eliminating terrorism, you will be breeding it. I guarantee you - Deliberate targeting of civilian centers, even if warnings are given before-hand to minimize casualties, will NOT dissuade further attacks on the U.S. . It hasn’t dissuaded attacks on Israel by Palestinians and it’s even less likely to dissuade Afghans from attacking us.
Again, I also think it is morally evil. But we’ll put that aside.
Which is all anyone can ask for.
Well that and you agree with me immediately in all things 
.
Well, I haven’t been shouting in dismay. I hardly know you, after all. But I certainly have liked some of your posts and thoughts ( not every one, but certainly some of them ) before. I’ve also disagreed with your thoughts before, as I recall. And I remember you very graciously inviting me to a local gathering by e-mail, once. But agree or disagree, I’m not in the habit ( which means I do it, but not often ) of cheerleading that much, unless I’m already participating in the discussion and there’s a point to it.
It’s not that I necessarily think you’re an evil person, I just totally disagree with you on this issue. I do feel what you are advocating is an evil thing, but I understand the impetus behind your thoughts ( I think ) and I’m not currently of the opinon that you advocate these actions for evil reasons. But then evil has been done for seemingly the best of reasons before.
I just happen to think you’re flat-out wrong this time.
- Tamerlane
All righty then…
Let’s try this angle.
It has been frequently shown that terrorist factions, in an attempt to avoid reprisal, hide themselves in large population centers. If the Taliban secretes themselves within the central population of Kabul, will or should that completely discourage us from bombing whatever elements of the Taliban government that we can identify?
As much as I would like to see surgical destruction of the Taleban infrastructure, it represents little in the way of a substantial threat to any other terrorist supporting nation or group. Read your books on military history. Wars are not won by delicately mincing about. Frequently, a more hob-nailed approach is the most effective and productive.
I have never been one to advocate wholesale slaughter of civilians. Nonetheless, that is exactly what has happened to our own people and those responsible for it must see the same horrors visited upon them. It would be all too easy to ascribe this to some variant of Mosaic law, as in “an eye for an eye…”. This is not what I am supporting. What I suggest is a demonstration of resolve upon the part of the United States to eliminate any and all support for terrorists.
In another thread reference was made to the movie “The Usual Suspects” and its main character Kyser Sozer. It may well require that we, like the movie character, be willing to do what our enemies are unwilling to do. An initial and devastating response to this murderous rampage is all that will be respected by such bloodthirsty rotters. I hardly see where mere coutroom prosecution is going to have any affect whatsoever.
** Zenster**
This is why I have a problem with the ‘this is war’ model.
The ‘entity’ with which we’re claiming to be at war is a small, very highly secretive, very, very well financed and mobile group.
Even if the Taliban has in the past ignored their location, what in the world makes you believe that they all are currently in Afghanistan in the first place?
Up until very recently, there was a group in Va, another in Boston, another in Florida, another in Hamburg. Sometimes their neighbors had an idea there may be problems, sometimes not.
POint being - by using the ‘war’ model, you’re giving this group of thugs the legitimacy and status they have claimed. They believe their cause is a just and holy war. I believe they’re criminals and aught to be treated as such.
When you have a criminal that is being harbored by some one else, you prosecute and seize both. But what you don’t do is get some idea that the person you want is in city A, then send your bomber planes over to take out the region. If you know the city, you search the city. If you find the house, you circle the house. If you don’t know the city, you don’t wipe out the area in the hope that you were right.
No. No. No. and No again.
What the terrorists did to us is reprehensible, unforgiveable, and yes, it was slaughter. This attack was born out of years of hatred for what our government does/what they perceive our government does. They elected to take that hatred out on innocents, civilians, and people are justifibly outraged.
To turn around and suggest that we do the exact same thing isn’t justice. It merely turns us into terrorists as well. We cannot target people for widespread execution for the “crime” of living in a country that terrorists also live in.
I suppose we suffer from a difference in semantics or the like here.
I do not propose that we do the exact same thing that they did to us. I do not propose that we target an exclusively civilian area with the sole intent of murdering thousands of innocent people. I propose that we should bomb one of their major cities in an attempt to both dismantle some of their power structure, show the Afghani people the consequences of Taleban rule and dissuade them from trying such a demented thing ever again. What they did was an act of cowardly mass murder, tantamount to a declaration of war upon the United States. There is little or no distinction to be made between Osama bin Laden and the Taleban. Both of them have the avowed purpose of killing American citizens and should be seen as equal enemies. To claim that bin Laden is actually from Saudi Arabia and not Afghanistan is merely intellectual smoke and mirrors. Please remember that Saudi Arabia expelled him some while back.
What I suggest we should do is to prosecute the war that they have started. If they have no belly for war, they should not have started one. There is a vast difference between what they have done and what I propose. I know that very few of you see it that way, but I differ quite strongly and quite possibly irreconcilably with most of you on this matter.
Response to a declaration of war is entirely different from the cold blooded slaughter of thousands in an atrocious act of violence. War is what happens to those who circumvent the reasonable avenues of diplomacy. They have done so, let them reap the whirlwind.
In general, I support Zenster. I don’t see that he’s advocating genocide here; he’s saying that it’s time to go to war. War is hideous, but it’s sometimes necessary to stop an even more hideous regime. Our foes have shown that they have not responded to reason in the past, and it’s time to take unabashedly decisive action. I desperately want our military to be able to surgically remove the Taleban and the terrorist cells and cause no collateral damage, but I don’t think that’s possible.
However, we have not been involved in a large war for years. Military technology and intelligence are a lot more precise than they used to be, and maybe now we will see an example of how they can be used to achieve our goal quickly with a minimum of civilian casualties.
Zenster is just filled with righteous anger right now, as am I. I don’t know him personally, but I know he’s not a murderous racist; he’s expressing graphically what might happen in the course of this war. And if we are not decisive enough, bin Laden is only going to try to top himself with an even worse atrocity. Let’s hope, Zenster, that we can, in Colin Powell’s words, uproot the network and destroy it.