----- Original Message -----
From: "Tris Schuler" <tristanjohn@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
To: <olympus@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Sent: Wednesday, September 12, 2001 6:12 PM
Subject: Re: [OM] [OT] Terrorism thoughts
> The problem I see is the bad logic which suggests these "rogues" are not
> supported by their nation-state populations. Were all Germans 100% behind
> the Nazi regime? No. Was the German populace mainly behind the Nazi
regime?
> Yes. Could that Nazi regime have come to power to begin with, much less
> sustained itself, without this support? No. Were the Allies, therefore,
> effectively at war with the German people, the German culture itself? Yes,
> we were. Was this "right"? It was inevitable. there was no other way
around
> the situation. What were we supposed to do, wait around until the German
> people came to its collective sense and killed Hitler? Does that strike
you
> as wisdom?
The situation isn't the same.
It essentially is identical.
The Nazis were elected and then started their
campaign, which was supported by the majority.
You point out niceties, irrelevancies.
IIRC, the Taliban regime took power.
That isn't much different than arguing (as many still do, by the way, as a
way of justifying the actions, or inactions, of the German people in the
30's and 40's) that the Nazi's came into power during "strange and
difficult times" (as they surely were) and so we shouldn't hold anyone
actually accountable for the eventual consequences. That is nothing more
than gibberish.
The only meaningful point is that the Taliban regime is in power. If they
people who do not support this regime, who, you clearly imply, are in the
majority, will not or cannot effect a change then it is up to America and
it Allies (again) to effect that change for these people.
Even if the government is supporting terrorists (which they probably are),
Definitely are. Where have you been? Why are you in denial on this?
I don't believe that this is supported by the majority. It is one small
heavily armed group (Osama bin Ladan's group) being supported by another
small heavily armed group (the Taliban government).
Again, the only meaningful point is that it all center on Kabul, which as
far as I know is all that passes for a "major" city in Afghanistan these
days. Kabul serves as the seat of power for Taliban, and so it perforce
becomes a target, the geographical target, if you will. That's just the way
it is.
Just because the Taliban government is in control of Afghanistan right now
does not mean that
the Afghan population supports their actions or should be punished for
those actions. I agree that if Osama bin Ladan is responsible then the
Taliban government should also be punished, but that does not mean that
the innocent Afghan population should be punished. That will only create
more people that have a bone to pick with the US.
It doesn't matter who supports whom. It only matters who is in control, it
only matters we rid ourselves of these certain menaces to our way of life.
The same is true for Iraq. There were many groups within Iraq that did not
support Saddam. However, when the US attacked Iraq and also destroyed
these people's homes they became angry at the US and began to support
Saddam. If anything, the US's attacks on Iraq increased Saddam's support
because the US's attacks angered so many people that weren't strong Saddam
supporters
before then.
> What to do? For openers, and besides hunting down and executing Osama bin
> Laden, we need to get rid of the ruling Taliban regime in Afghanistan,
> occupy that country, and remain in occupation until a rational form of
> government might be established, until the people who populate this region
> of the planet can be educated to pursue more thoughtful ways. How long
> would that require? A couple of generations at the least I gauge. Is that
> possible? Well, anything ought to be possible. With the will. I don't know
> how practical it is, though, given politics and the greed which drives
> capitalism. I do know that nothing less will suffice in the long run.
This aproach has never worked in the past, you should learn your history.
This is exactly the same thing the US did with Cuba when they kicked out the
Spanish and it directly resulted in Castro's revolution, which the US is
still having to deal with. Foreign occupation is never popular with the
local population and will only create more extreme nationalist movements
that have a bone to pick with the US, except this time they'd have the
support of the majority of the population too.
Let me get this straight: you think because of the Spanish-American War
that America "gave" Castro to Cuba? And please explain to me how and when
America sat in Cuba for a couple of generations until a stable government
was realized, until its people were properly educated, etc. Because that
was what I advocated. As far as I know Cuba immediately inherited precisely
and only what all Spanish-speaking countries and peoples have known going
back to time immemorial: dubious to downright rotten rule. That America is
"responsible" for this I would agree, but then that's another issue, and
from another century, I might add, and so quite outside the context of this
discussion. Even were it germane, and it clearly is not, how would one
identifiable mistake justify another?
In addition, the US should also start excepting some of the blame for
creating Osama bin Ladan's group.
Thank you but I have no intention to blame myself or the American people or
the American government(s) for Osama bin Laden. That's more gibberish. And
frankly, you and other who think similar thoughts worry me.
Look. None of this is part of the religion of Islam, which holds far
different beliefs. It is the work of fools and crazies and we need to deal
with that part of the equation. I don't advocate changing the entire Arab
world. If those people like their present lives, fine by me. But America
cannot, for its own survival, tolerate what we have today with these
extremists. And I see no other nation on earth taking the job in hand. If
we don't it ourselves it won't get done.
bin Ladan was trained and equiped by the CIA back when the Soviets were at
war with Afghanistan. The US trained him to be a terrorist in order to
fight the Soviets. Now they face the consequences of arming and supplying
a dangerous individual. By your logic, the US is just as guilty in
yesterday's tragedy as the Taliban government is. Should NATO then
annihilate the US as well?
Osama bin Laden isn't the way he is because the CIA trained him, he's the
way he is for reasons which I doubt the world will ever learn of. Whatever
the reasons for why he is the way he is we need to rid the world of him and
those like him for the reason he and his kin are mentally unbalanced.
I'm not saying that this excuses yesterday's attack. I'm simply pointing
out that we generally tend to look only at the surface of an issue and not
at the deeper issues. bin Ladan is a dangerous criminal who should be
punished, but it's not just the Taliban government that has been
supporting him. If it
weren't for the US's actions in the 80's he would not have been capable of
launching yesterday's attack.
Of course it's not only the Taliban regime. There are others out there and
these need to be dealt with as well. All of them, every last one. I hope
that's clear to everyone. If it isn't, then kiss New York and Chicago and
Los Angeles and San Francisco goodbye, because they'll be the first cities
to play host to the mushroom clouds as soon as these maniacs come round to
the thought--if they haven't already.
God help us all.
Tris
|