Why should the US be forced to apply diplomatic pressures? If an American citizen were accused of being the mastermind behind the deaths of 5,000 + citizens of any other country (or even our own), don’t you think that our government would be busting its ass to find a way to see to it that the person was given a fair and impartial trial? You honestly believe that the US would simply say, “Well, show us the evidence and we’ll see if we can’t find this guy.”? Puhleeze, we’ve turned members of our military over to foreign countries for trial when they’ve been accused of a particularly heinious crime (the US soldiers now serving time in a Japanese prison for raping a little girl comes to mind)! Why can’t the Taliban do the same for Bin Laden? Perhaps its because the Taliban know that if Bin Laden’s found guilty of crimes against humanity they’ll be next on the court docket.
Nice to know that WW2 started in 1951
Sorry to nitpick but this has been bothering me ever since I read it.
Carry on
I remember hating knee-jerk liberal college kids even when I was in college. Nothing’s changed
Gex Gex seems to have misinterpreted everything I said so I have little faith that further posts on my part will be correctly translated into whatever bizzarre mindset he holds. In any case, RickJay is raising the same points that I would have and doing quite well.
Dryga_Yes – Welcome to the boards! Great post!
–dr. p [a confirmed pro-military-actionist]
Saw this on MSNBC, and no, I don’t have a cite. It’s probably U.S. propaganda anyway: 
Bunch of aid workers went to Kabul, then back to Pakistan. Upon being interviewed, they said the number of civilian casualties in Kabul was 10, rather than the 70 claimed by the Taliban. Further, they stated that morale in Kabul among the civilians was high because:
1 - They realized that the military rather than civilians were being targetted, unlike during the Afghan civil war, when civilians were fair game for all sides.
2 - The Taliban vice police were unable to do their usual job (which as far as I can tell involves beating women who beg on the street because they’re not allowed to work), so life was getting more relaxed.
Interesting, eh?
*bolding mine
I don’t recall hearing Mr. bin Laden complaining about the Kyoto agreement or the nuclear non-proliferation treaty (although I do agree that the US should go along with both), he mostly talks about how the US is the great Satan for having our troops in the middle east and that his version of the Qu’ran justifies killing all Americans, civilians and military alike, in all countries of the world. Funny, the copy I’ve had for 3 years doesn’t mention that. As to the ‘king of the world’ pot shot, America is the world super-power, both militarily and economically. We provide 80% of the troops to most UN military actions. Our military and our market are our conrtibutions to the global community.
That’s good, talking out both sides of your mouth in one paragraph. As it has already been pointed out, maybe there was a reason in the minds of the hijackers and their leaders, but there was no justification for the attacks of 11 sep 2001, or the attack on the US embassy in Kenya (which killed more local Muslims than Americans), or the attack of the USS Cole, or the 1993 attack on the World Trade Center.
Sorry to revive this thread, but I just noticed this response.
Dave, a few things.
First, the embassy bombings occurred in 1998, not 1993. The USS Cole was last year.
Second, the evidence of bin Laden’s involvement in the embassy bombings and other attacks on US citizens was sufficent to convince the UN Security Council (including Russia, including China) to impose sanctions on both Sudan and the Taliban for their refusal to turn him over to the US, well before 9/11.
Third, regardless of whether or not we have conclusive proof about WTC, the evidence concerning the other attacks by Al-Qaeda is sufficient to demonstrate that bin Laden represents a continuing threat to US citizens.
Fourth, I think you dangerously confuse retribution and self-defense. The point here is not retribution, but to make sure that this individual cannot instigate further murders of US citizens.
Fifth, even if retribution for the Embassy bombings, the Cole, the first WTC, etc., has already taken place, so what? The retributive attacks did not end or lessen the threat. Further action is therefore required.
Sixth “going after” bin Laden is not a different concept than bombing Afghanistan. Bombing Afghanistan is the means by which we are going after bin Laden.
Sua
i continue to believe everything i’ve said, i will no longer be debating the details. take this as you will, i have no desire to continue repeating the same things over and over, and to be rebutted in the same ways over and over.
i must however counter this contention
not so. not entirely blameless does not equate with blame, and although this is not a real life example, i’m sure no-one could deny that it does have some weight:
william shakespeare’s king lear. lear may have done some pretty awful stuff in the course of the play, but the subsequent injustices inflicted upon him were inhumane and far outweighed his folly.
for the situation lear found himself in, he was not entirely
blameless. it wasn’t his fault however.
here is an example of how ‘not entirely blameless’ does not equal ‘fault’ or even ‘blame’. it is nothing more.
p.s
i am grateful for your attempts to improve my grammar. believe me, i trawled through your entire post attempting to find a similar failing, and the closest i can get is suggesting that BTW doesn’t appear in many standard english dictionaries. but then again, it’s hardly relevant, is it?
Gex gex, I have one response to your last post:
BWAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!
Wait, I’ve got one more:
hehehehehehe…
Wait, still one more:
“I know that every single point I made was completely and thoroughly disproved. But I refuse to admit defeat. However, I also refuse to sully my hands with actually SUPPORTING my views. I hereby declare myself the winner of this debate, and the debate is over.” Now, let’s see…what number was that on Fenris’s rationalization list?
There has been some concern by the Mods and others that I didn’t follow good protocol in the OP.
-Email Copyright issue. I emailed the authors and they gave me a website with the list: http://www.pitt.edu/~leftists/topfivelies.html
Mods, feel free to edit my OP and replace it with the web site. However, when I asked, the authors gave me full permission to post their email on any bboard. After all, it is their intention to have as many people see and discuss it as possbile.
-Commentary in the OP. I neglected to put any of my own commentary in the OP. I should have said “There are some interesting thoughts here. I tend to agree with most of them. What do you think?”. Mods, feel free to insert that in my OP if you want.
I will be more careful about what I say in the OP in the future.
Regarding the present debate(s) here and why I don’t respond, it has become a complex debate that has gone in several directions. I just don’t have time to debate and write more about it. I don’t intend to be a troll or drive-by poster. I appreciate the responses others have made, though. thanks.
Heh heh.
Curious George, methinks perhap your screen name could be changed to Ostrich George?
I’m just kidding. Dont mean to give you a hard time.
You’re very lucky, actually. A lot of college kids subscribe to this sort of hippy-dippy drivel without the benefit of such a worthy forum as the SDMB to help them examine their beliefs. The make-love-not-war cliched
university faction will try to unload just as many half-truths on you as their goverment alledgedly does. I learned a lot of things reading through this thread today. Hopefully you did too.
If you had to go away with 2 things, though, I would hope they would be
- Go donate blood, or volunteer for a relief effort. Learn to take care of our own rather than criticizing from sidelines.
- Tunnel vision is tunnel vision, whether its ultra-liberal or ultra-conservative. There are far fewer absolutes
in life than the OP would have you believe.
Keep an open mind.