Google| Subject | Re: Clobberin' Time... |
| From | James Trory |
| Date | 09/18/2001 02:00 (09/17/2001 20:00) |
| Message-ID | <rf2dqt8pqn58lbg8v08n4e8e2cr0ne2re7@4ax.com> |
| Client | |
| Newsgroups | rec.arts.sf.starwars.misc |
| Follows | Cryofax |
| Followups | C'Pi (5h & 1m) sdtilson@NewsReader.com (15h & 30m) Cryofax (16h & 36m) |
We've secretly replaced the Pacific Ocean with Folgers crystals. Let's see if Cryofax notices:
CryofaxThe attack on Pearl Harbour was not a terrorist one. WW2 had been going on for two years before Japan attacked the US. The United States should've joined the effort before that attack, it's just that the American government is very good at ignoring things until they affect them. It's the same case with terrorism.
James Trory <j_trory@yahoo.com>wrote in messageJames TroryCryofax
This is all just revenge talk and not constructive. You cannot fight terrorism like that.
Well I guess since the bombing of Pearl Harbor spurred us to WWII that entire conflict was "revenge" and not constructive? If striking back after an enemy attack is "revenge" then I guess it is revenge.
And so bombing those countries is the answer? What makes you think that a foreign country that claims it does not harbour terrorists, as Afghanistan has stated, will evacuate one of its cities so that America and NATO can bomb it flat? Was it not you who suggested we do that? Because I would not be surprised if Afghanistan refused to evacuate their cities, in which case what do we do then? Kill thousands of civilians?James TroryCryofax
Flattening a city will not do any good, simply because these terrorists hide in remote places that are inaccessible or simply undetectable. You don't think they go walking around with an "I am a terrorist" t-shirt on do you?
The point is to punish the country that harbors and aids the terrorists. Punishing the terrorists themselves is a seperate, though equally important issue. But making countries afraid to help terrorists for fear of retribution is most certainly constructive.
[snip]
You're suggesting blowing up cities that have been evacuated. People live there, you know. Isn't blowing up their homes unjustified punishment?James TroryCryofax
You've got to be careful who you're shooting at before you shoot at 'em. Cake has nothing to do with it. Why do you suppose terrorist groups in Ireland still exist? Because it's so damn hard to detect them.
Nobody is suggesting punishing anyone who is not actively helping/harboring the terrorists.
Excuse me, but I think you'll find that Shinn Fein, a large and popular political party in the Republic of Ireland, has been linked to the IRA for many, many years. They've funded them. They've helped them out in all kinds of ways. In fact, some members of Shinn Fein are active members of the IRA itself.James TroryCryofax
May I also say something about nationality, and I hope everyone reads this bit: Why is it okay to go to Afghanistan to blow up civilians in the hope that America will hit a few terrorists, but it wouldn't be okay (I am assuming) to do the same to Ireland? Is it because a lot of Americans have Irish family and heritage? Not many of you have Afghani family or heritage, right? Well then shit, that's okay. Bomb the crap out of them!
Again, you miss the point. It is to punish a country actively helping the terrorists, not just bomb a country where terrorists hide out in the hope of hitting one. The terrorists are hiding in Ireland but it is not government policy to fund and help them. The Taliban is a supporter of Bin Laden. Completely different situation. If Ireland had a state-sponsored terrorist program against us we'd be ready to level some Irish cities.
My question to you know, having corrected you, is why has America not stepped in before to "level some Irish cities"? If that's the right thing to be doing, as President Bush appears to be stating.
Also, may I remind you that technically speaking, the Taliban are not the government of Afghanistan.
Finally, I'd like you to read this and tell me what you think. It was posted to a British news website by a reader yesterday:
"The acts of terrorism perpetrated against innocent American civilians were wholly despicable. But now we hear that NATO and our Governmant have agreed that they accept in this case that an act of terrorism against one state is an act against all. So where were the United States during the last thirty years or so when other members of NATO, including the UK, France, Italy, Spain, Germany and many others have been the target of indiscriminate terrorism? As usual it appears that there is one rule for the USA, and another for everybody else."
09/11/2001-
-
-
-
