AMERICAN ATTACKS**PART ELEVEN: Long Haul

Subject: RE: AMERICAN ATTACKS**PART ELEVEN: Long Haul
From: kendall
Date: 26 Sep 01 - 10:02 PM

If we're not careful here, we might end up understanding, and, agreeing with each other!

The Moslims may not hate Christians, but they sure jumped at the chance to enslave American sailors after the USA lost the protection of the UK. Remember Commodore Preble? (local boy) and Captain Steven Decatur in their battles with the Barbary pirates? It was a Moslim country that was the first to declare war on the infant United States.

Preble and Decatur went over there and kicked ass. As Winston Churchill said in response to Hitlers threat to "wring Englands neck like a chicken"..."Some chicken, Some neck"

Subject: RE: AMERICAN ATTACKS**PART ELEVEN: Long Haul
From: GUEST,just a nobody
Date: 26 Sep 01 - 10:37 PM

Kendall, I wouldn't worry too much about agreeing ;)

You had made the comment about the embassy, to Carol's comment, it is far more than Vandolism. An embassy is considered to be American Soil. Yes, an attack could be considered an act of war, but not officially. I do think it is considered an act of Aggression against a country. The fact that we vacated the embassy does not lesson the act of Aggression, but it is doubtful we would ever pursue that too far. Now... if we had people in the embassy and a government laid seige to it, yes, it is an act of war. When we invaded panama several times did anti-US cries come out that we attacked the catholic church, because we surrounded and laid siege to another Embassy. But again, it depends on how far a country is willing to pursue it. Usually not very far, but they could be used to augment an argument in the UN.

There was a comment about what the Talbin are doing, forcing people into the military and such. I don't think we will see much military involvement until the food stores start shrinking a little more...

One thing about military involvement. There are alot of countries that are falling in line with the US, simply to see what the US is going to do. They don't want to be considered an enemy, not with Iraq still in recent memory. But, we will make an example of the Talbin (I think). Simply put, they harbored a terrorist and his organization. They said he had no method of communication (cough bullshit cough) and now misplaced him. The US stance is clear, if the government protects the terrorist, they will stand the same fate as the terrorist. This does not mean that we are going to go through raping and pillaging, but it does mean we cannot afford to bluff. The Talbin will test our resolve, but the true test is now comming in Indonesia. Al Quaid groups have threatened to hunt down and kill Americans and jews... the Taliban have threatened to do the same thing on our own soil. Other Middle-East countries have also warned us of this potential. They do know how the Al Quiad (how the hell do you spell that) fights. I just hope the media is doing the standard hype of the situation for ratings. Not like I am not on edge enough as is.

Peace love and hugs... and if that fails a pop in the eye

Just a nobody

Subject: RE: AMERICAN ATTACKS**PART ELEVEN: Long Haul
From: Donuel
Date: 26 Sep 01 - 10:54 PM

WAR at all costs OR Diplomacy at all costs. Neither alone is the best answer.

I hope the freedom we exchange for security is temporary.

Losing ones life, nation or planet is an eternal voyage. My stepfather , a constitutional law professor, died this week so I will no longer be able to ask his opinion although I never consulted him for any of the posts you will see here. Decisions now , will have a long lasting effect like the slightest angle you impart on a marble will determine its long term roll.

At these tender moments before a war a little thing like an idea in the right ear can make a difference. "For lack of a nail a war was lost..."

We are not powerless. I repeat we are not powerless. When you hear that little voice in your head that says "be careful what you say , these are troubled times , you don't want to get in trouble," THAT IS WHEN YOUR FREEDOM OF SPEECH IS DYING WITHIN YOU.

When you feel too powerless to consider an action that could make a difference is when freedom is dying all around you.

Don Hakman

Subject: RE: AMERICAN ATTACKS**PART ELEVEN: Long Haul
From: Troll
Date: 26 Sep 01 - 10:59 PM

There is a prohibition in the Koran against making fellow Muslims slaves but everyone else was apparently fair game.
You were referring, of course to the Barbary Pirates of North Africa. Thence the slogan "Millions for defense but not one cent for tribute!"
I can't remember who said it though.

troll

Subject: RE: AMERICAN ATTACKS**PART ELEVEN: Long Haul
From: CarolC
Date: 26 Sep 01 - 11:01 PM

Ok. I'm willing to use the words 'act of agression' in the context of what was done to the US embassy in Afghanistan. However, diplomatically, we don't recognise the Taliban as a government. And we do not occupy that embassy. We severed our diplomatic ties to Afghanistan before the embassy was attacked. So I think we're mostly splitting hairs on terminology.

I certainly don't think, in light of what's going on right now, that it's something to get excercised about. Correct me if I'm wrong GUEST, Just a nobody, but it sounds to me like that is what you are saying as well.

Subject: RE: AMERICAN ATTACKS**PART ELEVEN: Long Haul
From: Amos
Date: 26 Sep 01 - 11:26 PM

Please continue as needed on Part Twelve which can be found over here.

Regards,

Amos

Subject: RE: AMERICAN ATTACKS**PART ELEVEN: Long Haul
From: GUEST,just a nobody
Date: 27 Sep 01 - 09:01 AM

Carol, yep... pretty much. We *could* call it an act of war... but I think most of our allies would question that. It is an act of agression, but as we have both said, pursuing that would be a bad plan. Now... if the Talbin had *ordered* the embassy attacked... Well... I'm not so sure. We may not recognize them as the legit government. But diplomatic recognition and what it is in real life are often two different things. I don't think we would have been near as quiet had the government openly said to attack. I think (empty or not) we would have taken it as an open act of agression and probably an act of war, had the Talbin participated with the military.

I actually think the Embassy was still in use up until the attacks. We used it for UN stationing. I could be wrong, please correct me if I am wrong.

Subject: RE: AMERICAN ATTACKS**PART ELEVEN: Long Haul
From: CarolC
Date: 27 Sep 01 - 09:16 PM

GUEST, Just a nobody, I hadn't heard anything about UN stationing, so I don't know if that is true or not. The news coverage I've heard has said that we vacated it back in the 1980s. But they could have been only speaking in terms of using it as an embassy.

Subject: RE: AMERICAN ATTACKS**PART ELEVEN: Long Haul
From: Wolfgang
Date: 28 Sep 01 - 04:48 AM

Troll,
I meant my short list of possible actions as a way that would less Moslems turn into future terrorists than e.g. a big bombing campaign of two or three countries.

At the moment there is hope that the actions of the US government make much more sense than some talks of the president. If only someone could tell him that his words are braodcasted and read all over the world and not only locally in the USA. He seems to go for the quick applause of the respective local clientele and forget his position in the world.

Wolfgang

Subject: RE: AMERICAN ATTACKS**PART ELEVEN: Long Haul
From: Troll
Date: 28 Sep 01 - 07:36 AM

Wolfgang, at the present time there is not a lot of understanding of the Islamic world in my country at any level both in and out of government.
The idea of inter-country loyalty based on religion is a foreign concept in the West and in the USA in particular. We can't seem to understand that, in the Muslim countries, an action which is percieved by them as an insult to Islam, will turn the whole Muslim world against us.
And what they feel is an insult might not even be noticed by us. We need to tread very softly.

troll

Subject: RE: AMERICAN ATTACKS**PART ELEVEN: Long Haul
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 28 Sep 01 - 08:09 AM

USE THE NEW THREAD PLEASE - otherwise it gets hopelessly confusing.

---

These are the threads in the series on the World Trade Center Tragedy. Please post only to the most recent thread in the series. The others are closed because they are too long for some browsers to open. There is no need to "refresh" old threads in this series. These links should be sufficient.
Thanks
-Joe Offer-

---

• World Trade Center-Unreal Disaster
• AMERICAN ATTACKS--PART TWO
• AMERICAN ATTACKS---PART THREE
• AMERICAN ATTACKS- - -PART FOUR
• AMERICAN ATTACKS- - - PART FIVE
• AMERICAN ATTACKS**SIX -about enough huh?
• AMERICAN ATTACKS**PART SEVEN..thoughts
• AMERICAN ATTACKS=PART EIGHT.more still
• AMERICAN ATTACKS**Part 9,one week later
• AMERICAN ATTACKS*PART TEN-&the future is
• AMERICAN ATTACKS**PART ELEVEN: Long Haul
• American Attacks**Part Fifty - Got him!
• American Attacks**Part Twelve: Steady On
• American Attacks:Thirteen and Lucky?

---

This thread is closed. Please do not post any more messages in this thread. Additional messages will be deleted.