Re: Viable hydrogen vehicle by 2010

From: Tkalbfus1 (tkalbfus1_at_aol.com)
Date: 09/23/04 

Date: 23 Sep 2004 17:18:10 GMT

>I have to sadly disagree. We can win by becoming terrorists ourselves. In
>fact, I doubt that we can win against terrorist organizations without
>sinking to their level.
>

The trick is to get the terrorists themselves to see that. If they can see that
we will resort to brutal tactics to get rid of them, they'll quickly cone to
see that we can easily outkill them and if we out kill them, their cause is
lost, so why bother fighting in the first place?

Right now were being Mr. Nice guy and being ever so careful in our retaliation,
so careful in fact that many of the terrorists have a chance to escape after
commiting their act. Of course no matter how careful we are, some innocents in
populated areas will die, but that's aways been true of modern warfare.

>Of course, it's time to add some inflammatory language on this issue. To
>some extent, terrorism is in the eye of the beholder. When you see U.S. air
>strikes in the cities of Iraq, and a lot of civilians are killed each time
>that the U.S. claims to have destroyed a terrorist hideout, don't you think
>that the relatives of those Iraqi civilians see the U.S. practicing
>terrorism against them?

And don't you think the relatives of the terrorists themselves will say the
same thing? If these relative expect US soldiers to be so careful of not
killing them that they aren't even defending themselves, it is because they
don't want the US soldiers to win, they are on the side of the terrorists and
whatever their fanatical cause may be.

>I'm not trying to take any moral high ground on
>this issue - I just have a hard time agreeing with any argument that the
>U.S. is "playing fair" when the Iraqi civilian casualty rate is so high.

The moral high ground is for after the war has been won. If we lose the war no
one is going to praise us for sparing civilian casualities, they didn't after
the Vietnam War, but the fact is we could have nuked the *** out of them and
could have likewise nuked Iraq when it was our enemy. we could have taken the
"easy road" of annihilating the Iraqi population so they don't trouble us
again. Its so much easier to destroy cities than to bring order to them. The
fact that we have spared so many Iraqi civilian's lives by not leveling their
cities goes largely unappreciated. Most of the Iraqi civilians these days die
at the hands of terrorists. the terrorists aren't very careful where they put
their bombs, their aiming is not very precise, and typically their terrorist
attacks kill more civilians than the soldiers their aiming for anyway. And what
about the "head chopping" of civilian workers. The terrorists make demands that
we release so-and-so prisoners or they execute these innocent civilian workers,
they don't even pretend that these workers are guilty of something. if the US
government were to do something similar, they round up 100 random civilians and
execute them for every attack against US soldiers did, but we don't.

>At this point, it's difficult to know what to do regarding terrorism and
>Iraq. To "kick ass" would probably require that the U.S. gets REALLY
>involved, and simultaneously takes care of problems throughout most or all
>of the middle east. Obviously, this would probably involve WWIII.
>

It already does, the war on terrorism is a global war and hence a world war. I
don't know why some left leaning groups are always trying to find something
sympathetic in what some terrorists are doing? Why try to humanize terrorists
who head-chop innicent civilians they have captured? Why compare it to a
hapless civilian who gets killed in an airstrike against terrorists? Do you
really want the terrorists to win? If not then we have to fight them where they
live and breed, its not enough to simply increase security at our airports and
clamp down on civil rights.

By the way, it took a small terrorist act to start World War I. if the
terrorists start World War III, they'll be hurting more afterwards than we
would. the sooner the better too. I'd rather not wait and stall on legal
technicalities until they actually have nuclear weapons in their possession.

Tom

Quantcast