I fear the secondary disease more than the primary

[Skuzzy]

Yes, there is another disease spreading slowly amongst us.

I am amazed at the human capacity to rationalize anything.  Husnabds and wives rationalize thier affairs, drug users rationalize thier usage, murderers rationalize why it was appropriate to kill and so on.
There is not an event in the world's history that cannot or has not been rationalized away.
We just witnessed the most horrific act of terrorism the world has ever known, yet there are those who are starting to rationalize that too.  Only this rationalization is not to justify or admonish what happened, it is to find a way to not react to it.
It is also know by the phrase, "finger pointing".  A deadly disease which causes actions to be delayed, arguments to fuel that delay, friction between what is right and what is wrong to further fuel the delay.
It causes a loss of focus, it moves us off the path we are inherently afraid to follow.
It causes debates to rage on and on, with no logical conclusion to be reached, as the debaters reach a point where they have forgotten what they were debating about in the first place.
It causes paths to be separated, confused, and entangled in a web of words.
The simple facts get confused, lost, or forgotten in a snowball of rhetoric.

Terrorism, no matter where, no matter who supports it, must be erradicated from the face of this planet.  This is not a United States of America issue, this is a world issue.  Let's not lose sight of this.

[ 09-16-2001: Message edited by: Skuzzy ]

[1776]

At this point in time it doesn't matter why things are the way they are. It only matters how things are going to be.

[Tuomio]

If you cant nuke Kabul because somebody thinks rationally, is the rationalization the problem?
Declare war on rationalization...

[Dowding]

I understand what you are saying Skuzzy, but fortunately the ability to rationalise is what separates ourselves from the animals who committed Tuesday's acts.

I'm not sure I'd like to live in a world where those with power were unable or unwilling to consider their actions before acting.

 

At this point in time it doesn't matter why things are the way they are. It only matters how things are going to be.

Really? And exactly how do you expect to understand the problem without looking at where or why it developed in the first place?

But then again, those cruise missiles are very smart these days, I'm sure its well within their capability, if not ours...

We need to stop this from ever happening again and military action is only a small part of anti-terrorism operations. This should be uppermost in our leader's minds.

[ 09-16-2001: Message edited by: Dowding ]

[maik]

well said Dowding.

In fact military operation is probably one of the most ineffective actions against terrorism.

Even though i share your feelings Skuzzy,I think a fast military reaction might comfort us but wouldn't do anything to the groups that are responsible for this tragedy.

IMHO many is up to the work and coorperation of Intelligence services. And prolly we won't see or notice of what they will do.

But I a still confident that the world finally saw who the true enemy to mankind is these days.

<S>

[ 09-16-2001: Message edited by: maik ]

[leonid]

Skuzzy,

That is certainly a concern, and one that affects a free society most:  popular opinion.  However, this is like no other war we've encountered, not even like Vietnam.  This is about to be a guerrilla war on a world scale.  The enemy has no official boundaries, and will move from country to country as needed.  Financing will cross country, and political lines.  There will be no easily discernible target, but many elusive ones, and they will be found just about anywhere, from the mountains of Afghanistan to a small town in the USA, or Europe, or Asia.  The possiblility of a regular war against a nation hosting terrorists is certainly high, but what is a certainty is that the war will be fought in our own countries, ie USA, England, France, Germany, Russia, Japan, and the list goes on.

Colin Powell is of the mind that if we're to fight a war, we should fight to win.  Since this is a war like no other, we should do everything we can to know what we are really fighting against, what effective resources are available now, and what resources need to be developed now.  This is very sound military advice.

[Maverick]

War for any reason is a cause to be sad. There is no other way to describe the fact that war causes heart ache and loss.

In this and several other cases it doesn't matter if your side wants or does not want a war. It may be forced upon you. Not taking action leads to additional unprovoked attacks and losses by an enemy that has no concern other than your death and destruction. You may try to talk and resolve the situation but that is useless when the other side has but one goal, the removal of you from the face of the earth. In that case there will eventually be peace, but it will be the peace of your grave.

There comes a time when in order for differences to be resolved the 2 parties have to be in a position to listen. In this case a terrorist bent on your total destruction will not listen until you have no voice left. I am sure there were many voices on those 4 hijacked airliners who plead and asked for the chance to resolve the situation. We have seen the option they were given by the terrorists. Cooperation did not result in resolution, it resulted in death.

We can be united in the removal of terrorism from this planet or we can continue to suffer the consequences of it. Make a choice as the question has been forced upon us by the terrorists. This is a pass fail exam and putting it off is not an option.  

Mav

[Skuzzy]

Oh, oh.  The gest of my post was not taken the way I had intended it to.

I am of the mind we need a well thought out and coordinated effort, from all sectors, not just the military.

You do not do this irrationally.  We need to be rational about the approach.  I was alluding to those who would rather rationalize why this happened and taking it a bit further, how we can rationalize out way into not doing anything at all.

Two extremes to be avoided, to be sure.  There is a middle ground and one we need to find, between those that would nuke the world out of existance and those that would rather "point fingers" and move on.

Is that a bit clearer?

The reason for my post was due to the lack of focus I see developing here and in the media.  We seem to be reaching for answers without understanding the question.
I hear people rationalizing in a most negative manner.  As to say, we should not do anything but butt out of the worlds problems.  Then the extreme of those screaming for nukes.  This mentality will only serve to split us and deny what we, and other countries of the world must eventually do.

[ 09-16-2001: Message edited by: Skuzzy ]

[Dinger]

Reason is a rare commodity these days.
For instance, we see the call for the US to unite, and we see the notion, largely propagated by the US Media that this was an attack on the United STates, and the United States will react, and the rest of the world will follow.
That's not quite the best way to go about this. If you listen to someone in the administration with brains, such as Secretary Powell, or if you listen to anyone else in the world, it's clear that this is an attack not merely on the United States, but on the whole world.  Of the five thousand people missing in New York, thousands are citizens of countries other than the US.  The WTC was targeted to kill them as well.  People from at least forty countries will have died, and in some cases hundreds.  We're looking at 500 Japanese, hundreds of UK citizens, hundreds of Irish; the Royal Thai Embassy Office, and so on.  Take a look at the list of offices in WTC 1 and 2 and
In other words, this attack is a severe blow to many other countries, and for many countries, this stands as the worst terrorist attack on their citizens ever.
So this tragedy unites all of us, not merely citizens of the USA, but of all countries.

But what do we do about it?  Going after an international terrorist organization isn't exactly a job for conventional armies; although massive mobilization will make us feel better.  Surrendering our basic freedoms is tantamount to admitting defeat.

Hhehe I predict a couple of special ops missions to take down alleged conspirators followed by massive conventional bombings of the areas for effect (and to claim that it was, indeed the bombing that killed 'em)

This thing is so atrocious even the Hezbollah condemn it.

[1776]

Dowding, this isn't a "problem" that can be solved  through  "understanding".  This is a war, not a "problem".  The enemy isn't interested in the past nor our compassion to right the wrongs as perceived by us or them of the past.  

THE ENEMY'S ONLY DESIRE IS YOUR DEATH.

I REPEAT: YOUR PERSONAL DEATH IS THEIR DESIRE.

Sounds simple, doesn't it?  Guess what, it is, very simple, very blunt, very true,period.

[leonid]

1776,

I believe what Dowding is saying is that terrorism is a war based heavily on ideology.  Like guerrilla warfare, it relies on a sympathetic civilian population for cover, and for resources.  In order to truly end terrorism we need to understand what conditions would make a civilian base sympathetic to terrorist activity, then go about taking steps to eliminate those conditions.  I believe many of the conditions can be eliminated by social, economic, and political activity, rather than military.  So, while military action will be needed to eliminate present terrorist organizations, non-military action will be necessary to eliminate the 'breeding ground' of terrorism, oppression and lack of political representation.

For example, when the Nazis invaded the Soviet Union, many Soviet citizens were ecstatic at being 'liberated' from the rule of Stalin.  If the Germans had responded to this sense of 'liberation from tyranny' with a policy of clemency and cooperation in occupied Soviet territory, the Soviet partisan movement would have died, or diminished to insignificance, by 1942.

[1776]

I beleive my previous post says it all.  There is no "come let us reason together".  It is black and white, death or life.  It is that simple,sadly, it is that simple.  If our western culture is to survive we must accept the fact that we are hated and only our death is the acceptable outcome of our enemy.  We in the West have absolute control over the outcome of this war.  The enemy can only be shown mercy.  To win we will have to be merciless

[leonid]

Sorry, 1776, but a pure military solution to this problem will only result in continual death as more and more groups respond to the growing slaughter from all sides.  While we must endeavor to eliminate terrorist groups through military or paramilitary action, another operation must commence alongside this one.  An operation that works towards eliminating the conditions that would cause an average person to freely support terrorist activity.

[Eagler]

ya know, not knowing what they know in DC about this whole screwed up mess, we sound like a bunch of armchair quarterbacks!

I, for one, will support this government in whatever direction they, read those that know a hell of alot more than I do about this crap, choose to go - 110%. The last thing we need is the country/media second freakin guess every move our brave sons and daughters are ordered to take by those in charge. The US can win this battle - if we have the stomach for it. We only need to fear ourselves here. Grab them up America!

[ispar]

Originally posted by leonid:
1776,

I believe what Dowding is saying is that terrorism is a war based heavily on ideology.  Like guerrilla warfare, it relies on a sympathetic civilian population for cover, and for resources.  In order to truly end terrorism we need to understand what conditions would make a civilian base sympathetic to terrorist activity, then go about taking steps to eliminate those conditions.  I believe many of the conditions can be eliminated by social, economic, and political activity, rather than military.  So, while military action will be needed to eliminate present terrorist organizations, non-military action will be necessary to eliminate the 'breeding ground' of terrorism, oppression and lack of political representation.

For example, when the Nazis invaded the Soviet Union, many Soviet citizens were ecstatic at being 'liberated' from the rule of Stalin.  If the Germans had responded to this sense of 'liberation from tyranny' with a policy of clemency and cooperation in occupied Soviet territory, the Soviet partisan movement would have died, or diminished to insignificance, by 1942.

Well said... this is important. Guys, this goes far beyond "them" the enemy and "us" the good guys. "They" have a big part of the fault - but so does everyone. US policy, and human nature, everything that we take for granted as they stand at this time on this world will not allow this to end. We need to change everything if we want this to happen. The simple truth is that to destroy terrorism we need to unite everyone, on a world where war is a distant memory and harm to others is always a crime. Don't tell me this is hippy crap - I know it is. But it is the only way to totally elimate this stuff. This isn't about America, about Arabs or about Afghanistan. This is about humanity. And what Leonid said is what needs to be done to begin bringing people together.
True evil is simply a lack of empathy. And that is what the very root of this is.