Tis one thing to hate us. Tis but another to kill us.
Bush, in his speech, referred to terrorist organizations of “global reach.”
The dead at he WTC, at the Pentagon, and in PA were not collateral damage. They were the intended targets.
*Originally posted by Milossarian *
No, more because they have plausible targets for air power, whereas Afghanistan has none. “War madness” might best be defined as the desperate urge to take action, any action, when injured. It is an emotion that clouds reason, and utterly cancels compassion.
Well, explain to me “pans out”. Of course, bin Laden might very well have had contact with Iraqi’s. Also with Iranians, Turks, God only knows who else. What does that prove?
We love air power. It allows immediate response, and keeps the body bag count low. However, that won’t do us much good, the Afghans are “target poor”. (Don’t you just love military-speak? They can make raining death on people sound like something on a PowerPoint presentation) So, quite the opposite: there being nothing to bomb.
Your wording could well be taken to imply that if I disagree with a stern patriot like yourself, I must be somehow in sympathy with terrorists. I would treat that with the contempt it deserves, but such eloquence is beyond my feeble power. “Shame on you” will have to suffice.
I stand by that.
Presumably.
Military action that goes to great lengths to target the guilty, and spare the innocent. In the thrall of military madness, history has shown that otherwise sane and compassionate people will commit acts otherwise repugnant to thier nature. Let the thirst for vengeance pass, let the drums stop beating. Let us think long and hard, and act as befits a great nation, with restraint and calculation, and when we have beaten our enemy to his knees, stand ready to bind his wounds, house his widow and feed his children.
Those are the actions of a great nation, and not merely a powerful one.
And what shred of evidence do you have that our government is not being measured and prudent in its approach to this?
Do you think something as overwhelmingly atrocious as Sept. 11 requires a similar, overwhelming response against those responsible for it? A response that sends a message both to them and those contemplating similar actions against America what happens when they do such things? Why or why not?
Prediction: When civilians are inevitably killed, injured and/or endure some hardship as a result of whatever action we take, you will beat the drum of criticism.
Your entire credibility in this post was just destroyed by your bitter partisanship.
[QUOTE]
*Originally posted by Milossarian *
And what shred of evidence do you have that our government is not being measured and prudent in its approach to this?
AS time goes on, it appears that cooler heads may prevail. However, the first word out of George’s mouth was “WAR!” Hardly encouraging.
This is subject to misinterpretation. One might gather the impression that a similar loss of life and limb is necessary to satisfy your craving for…justice? Could you be more specific? Eye for an eye, 6,000 for 6,000? If they give us the Head of Osama bin Laden, will that do? What prudent measures have you in mind?
Because they are evil men, seeking the most vile oxymoron on human language, a “Holy War”. They not only do not fear retribution, they welcome it, thier whole plan depends on it! If they succeed in making the Muslim world, or even any significant portion of it, believe that we are at war with Islam, death and horror will stain our lives on a scale we haven’t seen in years. And they will have won.
Bet on it. Common decency demands nothing less. The child huddling in fear in Kabul is my child, yours as well. Thier lives are not to be shrugged off as “inevitable”, they are not markers in some bloodthirsty game of tit for tat. That is not justice. That is vengeance. And if it isn’t beneath our contempt, it damn sure oughta be!