Declaring War against terrorism

Subject: RE: Declaring War againt terrorism
From: Gervase
Date: 20 Sep 01 - 12:17 PM

Thanks for that, Deda. I had heard that Bin Laden was a weakened figure, and that the real hawks in Al Quaida were elsewhere.
Reminds me of the time when Libya got bombed because it was more expedient than bombing the real perpetrators in Syria. I wonder what mistakes we'll make this time around...

Subject: RE: Declaring War againt terrorism
From: Wolfgang
Date: 20 Sep 01 - 12:32 PM

Deda's link is truly worth making clickable and prominent:

WHO MASTERMINDED WTC: AN ALERNATIVE VIEW

Wolfgang

Subject: RE: Declaring War againt terrorism
From: Dave (the ancient mariner)
Date: 20 Sep 01 - 10:40 PM

Flattop. I rarely play with words or their meaning unless I am having fun with my family and friends. I try to state what I believe simply and directly. I have lost some friends during Wars, Police Actions and Terrorist acts; so you must forgive my lack of humour. Enjoy your weekend, you will hear no more from me on this subject. CarolC. I am willing to give my life if it would save someone. The motto of my service is "This we do that others may live" Yours, Aye. Dave

Subject: RE: Declaring War againt terrorism
From: Amos
Date: 20 Sep 01 - 11:02 PM

DTAM:

Here's to you, old honest sailor
Helping in a needful time
May the help you bring to others
Come back to you again, in kind.

Youse is a good man and true, DTAM, and let no one dispute it, either.

Regards,

A

Subject: RE: Declaring War againt terrorism
From: Troll
Date: 20 Sep 01 - 11:11 PM

Gentle winds and a following sea, shipmate. If you reach port before me, hoist one for me.

troll

Subject: RE: Declaring War againt terrorism
From: CarolC
Date: 20 Sep 01 - 11:19 PM

Dave (tam), I don't doubt for a moment that you would do as you say. But I fear that the giving of lives of brave people such as yourself will not save the lives of people like me in this case.

Subject: RE: Declaring War againt terrorism
From: Mary in Kentucky
Date: 20 Sep 01 - 11:19 PM

Greater love hath no man than this,
that a man lay down his life for his friends.

Subject: RE: Declaring War againt terrorism
From: bseed(charleskratz)
Date: 21 Sep 01 - 09:21 AM

Amos, I just reread my post and noticed a couple of typos and ambiguities which I would have caught had I not been in such a haste not to get it right but to get it written: Here are a few changes I should have made:

...the US is culpable for much of the deadliest terror in recent--and not-so-recent--history....

We have demonstrated since our beginning an off-handed willingness to commit genocide against the indigenous population of our continent and the genocidal slave trade--I recall figures of less than half the Africans taken onto slave traders' ships surviving the voyage, with another huge pecentage dying in the Caribbean slave breaking grounds. It's true that half a million Americans died in the war to end slavery, but how many died in the years after the war trying to establish rights for the freed slaves? Ya got a couple of free fingers to count on?

--seed (and when can we get back to the song contests?)

Subject: RE: Declaring War againt terrorism
From: GUEST,Frank
Date: 21 Sep 01 - 10:00 AM

This is a great thread. Here's what I think. Bush's speech was "politics". It assuaged the anger of many Americans. Once the anger is gone, what's left?

The Muslim community has a responsibility now to differentiate themselves from the fringe zealots.

Rhetoric about "enemies" and "terrorists" is masking the problem. There are poor people who can't afford to buy into the American "Dream" so they affiliate with crazy radical "religious" cults. It happens here in America with our own Comatose Posses and KKK.

Let's get off the anger bandwagon and look at the problem. We collect most of the output of the world's GNP. This should cause some bitterness in other countries.

Whether we call it "Jihad" or "Manifest Destiny" or "Save the world for Democracy" or any other jingoistic exhortations,it's still misplaced anger. We can be aware of the needs of other countries and make some effort to help them. Bombing innocent women and children will only serve the cause of the fanatic.

How about we pay our debt to the UN? How about we help the poor Arab in a repressive regime? How about a process of reeducation so that disenfranchised poor people throughout the world will not feel the necessity to align themselves with violence and terror to have their voices heard? If we are the "greatest country in the world" it seems to me that we have a responsibility to share our greatness with the rest of the world. Bombing the hell out of the Middle East is not the way to do this.

Less Kennebunkport Kowboy talk and more humanitarian aid and action.

I was appalled at the lack of dignity in the "president's" speech. Now, more than ever, we need inspiring words from a statesman leader who doesn't glorify war.

Frank

Subject: RE: Declaring War againt terrorism
From: Clinton Hammond
Date: 21 Sep 01 - 11:16 AM

One quick point from way back in this thread...

"An eye for an eye" The lesson of this is NOT REVENGE! It's to have the punishment fit the crime... I hate it when people say "An eye for and everyone ends up blind".. show's they have no idea what they're talking about...

And 'forgive us our trespasses..." Why doesn't it work? Because not everyone is x-tian, and ascribes to those beliefs... thank gods...

Subject: RE: Declaring War againt terrorism
From: Troll
Date: 21 Sep 01 - 11:29 AM

seed. It has been calculated that about 7% of the slaves transported from Africa were sold in the US. Most that came to this hemisphere went to the Carribean and to Brazil.
Frank, yes, we collect most of the output of the worlds GNP. We manufacture a great deal of it. Is it your contention that we should not enjoy the fruits of our labor?
"How about we help the poor Arab in a repressive regime? How about a process of reeducation so that disenfranchised poor people throughout the world will not feel the necessity to align themselves with violence and terror to have their voices heard? If we are the "greatest country in the world" it seems to me that we have a responsibility to share our greatness with the rest of the world."
Are you suggesting here that it's ok for us to go into another country and change their form of govt. because we don't like it? We did that in Chile and you all raised hell so make up your minds. Either it's ok or it isn't.
BTW, if you haven't read bin Ladens Fatwa, you really need to do so. It'll give you a better idea of where these people are coming from. Trust me, it ISN"T from the old Socialist POV.

troll

Subject: RE: Declaring War againt terrorism
From: InOBU
Date: 21 Sep 01 - 12:07 PM

Dear Guest:
I suppose you are not familier with the US justice system. As a matter of fact, the President cannot, under our legal system, extradict anyone without due process. In point of fact, this important aspect of US law was underminded long before Clinton, under the Regan administration in order to side step the courts and our constition in the case of Joe Doherty. I worked as a paralegal on that case before I went to law school, and alow me to clarify the dangers we now face.
The US executive branch (the office of the President)and the British government came into a nuetral environment, the Federal Courts, before judges who were predisposed to their case that Joe and the IRA were involved in terrorism. The first federal judge who heard the case, Judge Sprizzo said to Joe's lowyers, "Do you mean to tell me I cannot send this murderous son a bitch back to England?"
After a case where Joe's lawyers had no financial resourses (contrary to the rumor promoted by our two governments his case was so underfuned it bankrupted the firm)... after a long protracted hearing of many months the court and numerous courts thereafter ruled that England and the United States had failed to make the case that the IRA was involved in terrorism, but was rather another chapter in a long insurection.
In order to deport Joe, not extradict him, the US undermined very important protections of law. Shortly there after the cold war reasons behind England's need to artifically keep the war going in Ireland ended and suddunly they could talk to an IRA with whom for decades they could not speak.
Today the Federal government is seeking to bring about a more intrusive security state, while overlooking the fact that the prime suspects in this attrocity frequented a building wherein the bombers of the trade center ten years ago met and planned that action. Existing laws would have justified enough survalence to have, for example, uncovered the modle of the WTC on the ROOF! of that building.
It is far too easy to take a get tough approach when it is time to take a get wise approach. We cannot build a safer world by limmiting justice and liberty. As much as I dispise the Taliban, and I do, they do have a point when they ask for proof before handing over a wanted suspect. When we are no longer a world of law, no one is safe anywhere.
ALl the best, pray for peace and work for justice
Larry Otway

Subject: RE: Declaring War againt terrorism
From: Troll
Date: 21 Sep 01 - 01:50 PM

OHO! So you want the trial FIRST.
Picky, picky,picky.

troll ***good post tho.***

Subject: RE: Declaring War againt terrorism
From: Steve in Idaho
Date: 21 Sep 01 - 02:51 PM

Fascinating - Just a couple of corrections and simple comments as I have no answers to the deeper questions here. I struggle with all of it. From wanting to be the first to kill to the first to forgive.

CarolC - you are my hero today. I'll bet you are a brilliant and passionate musician.

troll - anyone coming into my home, without my permission, will put their life in forfeit whether my children are here or not. But with me one is dealing with an old cranky veteran who has caused others to die for their country. And cried like a baby when the "enemy" has caused one of my own to "lay down his life for his country." ( We really don't fight for country - we fight for our friends who fight in the battle with us. My Brothers and Sisters in combat with me at the time. It is a peer related issue.) It is my opinion that a specific act against a specific individual is much easier to respond to than one of several folks killing thousands. It gets blury with the addition of numbers. Especially when I don't know who to hit first.

Amos - Our Security Forces, police of the Air Force, are very well trained as police officers and we have what is known as "Article 31." Same as the Miranda Rights with a military twist. But places exactly the same restrictions on them as far as investigative and interviewing restrictions.

Please don't anyone take any of this as a personal affront - just my nickel's worth of experience in these matters. I didn't watch President Bush speak. I am an American Citizen, I voted in the election, the majority said that this man is our leader/head of state, retrospective assumption gains me nothing so I will do my best to support what the majority of my fellow citizens have decreed.

I oppose war, was part of the old Viet Nam Veterans Against the War in the late 60s and early 70s, was part of the underground railroad bringing folks out of South America, was against our involvement in Desert Storm, but I supported what we did by helping returning veterans with their claims against the government for injuries incurred during service. I know what coming back from war and being poorly labeled by those I represented felt like and the dramatic impact it has had on my life. So I will oppose this war but will support those who must go and fight in it.

Fairly conflictive position to be in huh? And I haven't even got out of my own head yet! So Thanks to you all - read the poem about taking care of friends - and try to see that we are all saying much the same thing - These are difficult times - Peace - Steve

Dave(tam) don't you ever leave - but enjoy the weekend - K?

Subject: RE: Declaring War againt terrorism
From: Skeptic
Date: 21 Sep 01 - 03:03 PM

Yeah Larry. What's wrong with you. If they weren't already guility they wouldn't be on trail. This is what comes of going to law school. :)

Thanks for a very informative post. You highlight an important issue: that most of us are fairly ignorant of what really goes on inside our court system but seem to view it as being fair, impartial and the true home of "Infinite Justice". (except for those damned lawyers, of course). Another bit reality we need to confront and correct.

Regards

John

Subject: RE: Declaring War againt terrorism
From: GUEST,petr
Date: 21 Sep 01 - 04:12 PM

the inequality argument doesnt wash. Ie. lets stamp out economic inequality, and the terrorists wont have a leg to stand on. Saudi Arabia is very wealthy, the per capita income is higher than the US. hell, they buy fancy suvs just so they can trash them in street races. And yet there are supporters of Al Qaeda in Saudi. Certainly there are poor populations all over the middle east - and many of them are uneducated and easily swayed by propaganda. The US is a target because it is the last remaining superpower, because it is the most prominent exporter of WESTERN culture. That is the root of the problem. THe terror attacks were not just an attack on the US but and attack on WESTERN civilization. WHich, like it or not, is the dominant civilization on the planet. A 1000 years ago it was the other way around, the Islamic world was the most advanced civilization- and much of the enlightenment in Cordoba (and the preservation of Greek writings was in the Islamic world) Mathematics (Algebra, Algorithm, the concept of zero), chemistry Alcohol (ironically) all came from this region and were picked up by the west (as well as the Latine sail - which was key along with gunpowder and the compass (chinese inventions) in dominating the world. The third most important development (printing) along with paper (another chinese) invention was key in spreading knowledge and information in the west. Even the Renaissance was kickstarted by the influx of books and scholars who came to Italy and other parts of Europe as refugees from Constantinople. The other (ironic) effect of that was to shut off trade from the east and encourage Europeans in exploration and colonialization. Yes the past was full of injustice, but the slaves that were sold in Africa were also captured by other Africans and slavery continues to this day there. Ironically, much of Africa is worse economically and more repressive as well as politically unstable 40years after the EUropeans pulled out. The US has certainly made shortsighted judgements in the cold war in supporting dictatorshipS (hes a bastard but hes our bastard) but ask an Iranian if hes better off now than under the shah. (I had some Iranian roommates when I lived in Japan, they said most young people dont care about fanatical Islam, they just want to live as in the west, party, drink etc - according to him - they represent the greatest danger to the Revolutionary guard) Most of those countries are police states anyway including Saudi Arabia, Syria, certainly not made that way by the US, and why should it be the place of the US or other western countries to install democracies around the world. Pakistan started off as a democracy, and is now a dictatorship with those that dwell on the US past conveniently ignore the US overthrowing a corrupt regime in Haiti, or getting involved in the Balkans and ultimately setting up conditions where the people overthrew the junta in Yugoslavia. THis is not even to mention the US involvement in the second world war. If the Nazis had won the Islamic world probably wouldnt even exist.

SOme of the past US actions may have encouraged the ISlamist extremists in the past - they perceive the US as being weak in many ways, (Clinton whom I admire was shortsighted in much of his foreign policy in this region) He wanted to have a lasting legacy by trying to encourage an Arab Israeli peace, by encouraging improved relations with Iran (a state which just recently hosted a meeting with Hamas and Hizbollah, in order to iron out their differences.) This ultimately made the US look weak. The US did not respond to the Attack on the USS Cole because they thought it would lead to more revenge attacks, as after the East African embassy bombings, Clinton lobbed a few missiles into Afghanistan and into SUdan because a commando raid to capture Bin Laden would have been too many casualties (both collateral and US) They should and probably will take a lesson from Mossad that knows how to fight terrorism on its own ground.

Subject: RE: Declaring War againt terrorism
From: Dave (the ancient mariner)
Date: 22 Sep 01 - 01:53 PM

There was public lighting in the streets of Damascus before Christ was born too. Yours, Aye. Dave

Subject: RE: Declaring War againt terrorism
From: Amos
Date: 22 Sep 01 - 02:29 PM

I know that military police are trained to enforce justice in well-defined ways.

I was speaking of soldiers and U.S. Marines being sent in as land forces, trained killers held in reserve to do the job of killing, then being told to frisk first and recite Miranda because we are pretending to do war but we are doing justice. My point is that war -- all its learned lessons and its training for life-or-death struggles -- is a very different skill than police action although both use weapons to make their point. Both are prepared for violence.

The reason declaring war is such an anathema is because it unleashes the dogs of war -- the Jurassic thought patterns of trained killers who are perhaps decent men and women outside of that framework, but whose major purpose is to take territory and lives away from the defined enemy.

If that is what we have to use because we have been attacked in outrageous fashion, I am sorry, but so be it written, so be it done. If we can clean up international terrorism with police actions -- tracking them down and arresting them -- let's do it that way. Let's not unleash the dogs of war and then tell them to act like hall monitors.

I think 6,000 lives and 40 billion in damages in four hours is pretty close to war, myself -- especially coming from an organized group to weasely to saywhat it has done. We have been named as the enemy in a covert violent war. The naming meant nothing to us; but the acts of war and the loss of our friends and cousins means something.

The problem is that it is a half-hidden enemy who believes in covert destruction. Intelligence when done correctly uncovers the covert.

The courses of action we are facing must include three things:

1. Huge amounts of effective intelligence gathering and analysis, identifying facts and their connections about the enemy from human, computer, financial, social, manufacturing, economic and all other germane intell. sources.

2. Precisely planned and effective special ops taking out exact locations and people known to support and act as enemy in the war.

3. Major communications designed to win friends among the populations involved in any nation, to make our motives and actions clear, to create and maintain operational consensus amongst coalition governments and to take out Big Lie operations against us -- such as the one started last week by the president of Afghanistan that our warlike attention is about Islamism. That is a terrible belief to allow to circulate unbchecked and only really expert public relations work can kill it in its tracks.

4. Including under 3. anything we can do to support decent human beings and provide them with hope for the basic freedoms listed in the Bill of Rights. Economic aid, morale building communications, discussions of what freedom means, etc. etc.

A

Subject: RE: Declaring War againt terrorism
From: Art Thieme
Date: 23 Sep 01 - 09:49 PM

One more----a good bumper-sticker type of sound bite. I have no idea if ir happened or not.

Hitler is reputed to've said, "The best part of our strategy is that our system forces our enemies to adopt our tactics."

Art Thieme