Re: Copper theft

In article <qlu2h2h12bldpdqip59faafl2kckhq392l@xxxxxxx>,
<gfretwell@xxxxxxx> wrote:
On Wed, 20 Sep 2006 13:00:41 +0000 (UTC), kensmith@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
(Ken Smith) wrote:

You can't really hurt these people much by bombing them, they don't
have much to lose and you end up killing more innocent people than
those you can prove were terrorists.

There are cities in Afghanistan. There are bridges and roads and at least
one airport. They also have livestock you could take out with strafing
etc. There may be less targets in Afghanistan than Iraq, but you can't
say there are none.

Yes and that is why they call Karzai the mayor of Kabul. We can
control the cities but Osama is not in the city. He is out in the
mountains and nobody really can control that ground. Bombing the
mountain his cave is in doesn't accomplish much.

That depends a lot on how accurately and intensely you do the bombing.

Also, he was very likely eating the livestock produced in the area.

[....]
Most historians agree Japan was starving and isolated by 1945 and the
bombs were probably unnecessary.

Most historians agree that the people of Japan did not even consider the
posiblility that they were losing the war. The US would have had to fight
there way in.


The first one may have nudged them
over the line toward surrender but the second one was just to push the
Russians back.

I disagree with that theory. The second one was to prove that the US
could do it more than once. Many people wanted there to be a
demonstration before the first one was used on a population center. The
idea was to blow up some small island somewhere and tell them to go take a
look at the results. This may have been a better way to go.


I dispute the notion that "Islam" felt that way. Indonesia is an Islamist
state. A lot of people reacted with sympathy and support when the World
Trade Center was attacked. This has been squandered since but at that
moment, there was a lot of support.

My fault again. I do tend to say "Islam" when I should say middle
eastern Islam.

No, you mean "radical so called Islam". It was and perhaps is a minority
in the middle east and not confined to the middle east. Not all
terrorists are Islamists either. Nominally, Timothy McVie, the unibomber,
and Eric Rudolpf are christians.










--
--
kensmith@xxxxxxxxx forging knowledge

.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: OT: A Debate that is Overdue
    ... within Islam which is far greater in numbers and support. ... pass compared to your views of Islam and Islamic extremists. ... claim for Islamic terrorists. ...
    (rec.audio.opinion)
  • Re: OT: A Debate that is Overdue
    ... You're missing the point that Christian extremists get a relatively free ... pass compared to your views of Islam and Islamic extremists. ... Are there approximately 100 million people worldwide who support ... claim for Islamic terrorists. ...
    (rec.audio.opinion)
  • Re: Sunni Political Group Withdraws From Iraq Cabinet
    ... I don't see how they can continue to support the Bush administration without committing political suicide. ... I'm beginning to hear references to criminal acts rather than "War on Terror." ... and Iraqi terrorists, if by terrorists one means those who commit ... Would you settle for "War on militant Islam"? ...
    (soc.retirement)
  • Re: OT: A Debate that is Overdue
    ... within Islam which is far greater in numbers and support. ... Islam is responsible for Islamic terrorists, ... one could say that Christians don't denounce ...
    (rec.audio.opinion)
  • Re: London bombs
    ... I am against the war in the middle east but that doesn't mean I ... "sympathized" with the terrorists! ... I support our soldiers and those ...
    (soc.senior.issues)