Re: Bush goes Nuclear!
From: Dave Typinski (nospam_at_nospam.net)
Date: 07/14/04
- Next message: mmeron_at_cars3.uchicago.edu: "Re: Bush goes Nuclear!"
- Previous message: Floyd L. Davidson: "Re: Question re. Copper artifact Canadian Arctic former Re: Copper Casting In America (Trevelyan)"
- In reply to: Joe Bergeron: "Re: Bush goes Nuclear!"
- Next in thread: Joe Bergeron: "Re: Bush goes Nuclear!"
- Reply: Joe Bergeron: "Re: Bush goes Nuclear!"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ]
Date: Wed, 14 Jul 2004 18:41:56 -0400
Joe Bergeron wrote:
>In article <hsiaf0lad5b4er8ijdcgqffkm5vvtlp1ao@4ax.com>, Dave Typinski
><nospam@nospam.net> wrote:
>
>> Joe Bergeron wrote:
>>
>> >In article <brd9f0p6bhg1bas0tr6bulenscd88i02ae@4ax.com>, Dave Typinski
>> ><nospam@nospam.net> wrote:
>> >
>> >> >Don't you consider it rather facile to pretend that the point these
>> >> >"idiots" are trying to make is that they should be killed?
>> >>
>> >> That's not the point they're trying to make - it is the point they're
>> >> making. If that's incorrect, what would you suggest as the proper
>> >> interpretation of their actions?
>> >
>> >I'm not really sure. I suspect it may have something to do with their
>> >resentment of having their nation invaded by a foreign power. Whether
>> >or not you believe it's for their own good, you may be willing to
>> >concede that it could be pretty hard to take.
>>
>> Of course, absolutely. I'm sure it's a bit of a two-edged sword to
>> the average Iraqi - Saddam's gone, but, look what had to happen to get
>> it done. Thus, I'm unsurprised when they evince mixed feelings about
>> the whole thing. They'd also 30 years of pent-up frustrations that
>> they vented upon the nearest thing to an authority figure at the time:
>> coalition forces. That, though, only lasted a short while,
>> immediately after the invasion.
>>
>> These folks, however, aren't the people with whom we're immediately
>> concerned. The concern is the group of terrorist insurgents made
>> largely out of foreign ideological mercenaries plus the remaining
>> dregs of the old guard. They voice their displeasure not by
>> discussion, but by suicide bombings, kidnappings, and RPG attacks. I
>> see no effective way to remove this threat other than to kill all
>> those involved. Appeasement won't work as accession to their stated
>> demands would make things immeasurably worse.
>
>I'm not convinced that the majority of these insurgents are outsiders.
>Nor do I expect anyone to react to armed foreign invaders with
>discussion. They are resisting the occupation of their country with the
>limited means available to them, just as you and I would be doing if it
>was our country that had been taken over. I'm sure they'd prefer to be
>doing it with tanks and A10s, but they don't have any and they aren't
>very good at using them anyway. I'm not calling them heroes or freedom
>fighters, just desperate, ignorant men who habitually try to solve
>their problems with violence.
And if they had been content to keep their violence wholly within the
Middle East, none of this would likely have happened.
They, this nebulous and poorly characterized group of Islamic
extremists, evinced the willingness and capability to affect our
national security (economically and physically) - and on our own soil,
no less. They've also been claiming for a long time that their
ultimate goal is the destruction of Israel and America. So, after
9/11, we finally took them seriously.
>It's disingenuous to pose in a cloak of
>moral indignation when our conquests don't result in the invaded
>parties rolling over to display their bellies. Kill them if you must,
>but don't feign outrage over their dastardly acts of non-compliance.
Well said. I am, however, not outraged that they react the way they
do given the circumstances. I'm outraged that they've been allowed to
exist at all. And *that* is a failing on our part and on every other
nation with a stake in keeping the peace and fostering economic
prosperity.
>> That's what I meant about the message they're sending. They claim to
>> desire the removal of coalition forces from Iraq. They claim to want
>> Israel to simply disappear. Both of these demands are irrational.
>
>Do you mean they are rational?
No. Israel will not disappear. The rest of the Middle East will be a
slab of Trinitite before that happens. Nor will the coalition forces
leave Iraq until it's government can stand on its own two feet. I
hope this is sooner rather than later; but, as you said, time will
tell.
>> Moreover, their actions aren't rational. Therefore, instead of
>> communicating a message of "leave us alone," they're communicating the
>> message, "the only way to stop us is to kill us."
>
>That's pretty much the same message communicated by any committed
>military or paramilitary force, isn't it? At least those that see
>themselves as having nothing left to lose.
This is an excellent point, and it's true. That's why the only way to
reduce the threat of terrorism is to proactively seek and destroy the
practioners and supporters thereof wherever they may be found.
-- Dave Typinski http://home.alltel.net/trapezium
- Next message: mmeron_at_cars3.uchicago.edu: "Re: Bush goes Nuclear!"
- Previous message: Floyd L. Davidson: "Re: Question re. Copper artifact Canadian Arctic former Re: Copper Casting In America (Trevelyan)"
- In reply to: Joe Bergeron: "Re: Bush goes Nuclear!"
- Next in thread: Joe Bergeron: "Re: Bush goes Nuclear!"
- Reply: Joe Bergeron: "Re: Bush goes Nuclear!"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ]
Relevant Pages
|
