How to win the War on Terrorism

[DinoDoc]

Originally posted by Imran Siddiqui
Um... The WTC is the very symbolization of American economic power.

You said that the government deserved to be attacked. You even implied that the 9/11 attacks and the deaths that followed were deserved. I may or may not agree with that statement. I'd just like to know if you can draw anything other than a tangential connection between airplanes, the WTC, & either the Federal Government or its policy in the Middle East. So far you haven't answered that question.

P.S. Too bad you changed your post Imran. The only thing that was missing in order for you to have made my point for me was the smilie.

[Imran Siddiqui]

I'd just like to know if you can draw anything other than a tangential connection between airplanes, the WTC, & either the Federal Government or its policy in the Middle East.

You think that economic globalization is directly to blame? Why are their troops in Saudi Arabia? To protect the oil! What is the symbolization of economic power in America? WTC! Not that hard. Then again, I wouldn't expect you to get it.

I still think that this new stance of your's stinks of backpedaling though.

It's a free country. Think what you want. Of course, it shows you haven't been reading or have been stereotyping. Still, it still doesn't change my belief that you are an utter moron.

[DinoDoc]

Originally posted by Imran Siddiqui
For your sake, I hope it is the later.

Neither. You've previously made statement to the effect that every Israeli deserves what he/she gets when it comes to Palestinian terrorism. I was merely curious about the reason why the same didn't apply to Americans.

[Imran Siddiqui]

Because the Americans aren't subjecting Arabs/Muslims to occupation. Oh, and btw, every Turk and Iraqi deserve what they get for the Kurdish occupation, and so on.

And 'Neither'. LOL, probably the former. Or reading what you want to read.

[DinoDoc]

Originally posted by Imran Siddiqui
Or reading what you want to read.

[Imran Siddiqui]

So you admit it? Since you have no counter argument, just smilies?

Since the beginning, I've argued that Israel is different in the modern world because it is a colonizing power. Therefore attacks are justified. You seem always to forget this, showing that read what you want to read, and assign stereotypes where you wish.

[DinoDoc]

Originally posted by Imran Siddiqui
Since you have no counter argument, just smilies?

Boredom is starting to set in. Sue me.

Therefore attacks are justified.

I actually agree with you that attacks are justified. I just happen to disagree with you on the matter of what type of attacks are justified.

[Arrian]

Originally posted by Imran Siddiqui
Yet doesn't that happen in just about every modern war (ie, killing of civilians)? Do you think then that every war is unacceptable?

INTENT, Imran, intent! That matters to me. In other words, Dresden was a war crime because it is clear (at least to me) that the Allied bomber commands decided to destroy that city as revenge for Coventry, when there was very little of military value there.

The Japanese attacks on Chinese villages where they dropped experimental bioweapons - those were warcrimes.

Other bombing raids, however, which were aimed at military targets but also killed civilians, many times due to the inaccuracy of bombs at the time, were not war crimes.

In my estimation, a war crime occurs when you intentionally target civilians. Unintentionally killing civilians is regrettable and should be avoided as much as is possible, but does not rise to the level of a war crime (such as the bombing of that wedding in Afganistan recently. We didn't mean to kill those people, but we did. It sucks, and we should make amends, but it ain't no war crime).

-Arrian

[Ned]

Arrian, IIRC, throughout most of the war, Bomber Harris conducted night bombing raids against German cities. The US, on the other hand, conducted day raids on military targets.

What made Dresden and Cologne (1945) different was US involvement in an attack on civilians - something the British had been doing the entire war.

The US raids against these cities so late in the war cannot be justified by any earlier attacks by Germans against British cities.

[Chris 62]

Technically LeMay's entire campaign is a war crime, as the target was the homes of Japan's citizens, long before the A-bomb was constructed.

When a world war is fought, fine distinctions are the first caualty of it.

[Ned]

IIRC, LeMay was also responsible for Cologne and Dresden as well.

He is further responsible for MAD - which kept the peace for decades.

[Arrian]

Wasn't the nutcase SAC general in Strangelove based on LeMay?

Chris' point about that bombing of Japan prior to the A-bomb attacks is a good one. How many people were killed in the firebombing of Tokyo (a city primarily constructed of wood)?

-Arrian

[chequita guevara]

185,000, estimated.

[Tingkai]

Re: Why are you obsessed with me?

Originally posted by Chris 62
I don't care about your opinion.

Then do yourself a favour and don't respond because each time you do, you dig yourself deeper into the ground.

Originally posted by Chris 62
And it's not Pakistan, it's El Qeada.

This is a prime example. Pakistan is supporting the Kasmir terrorists, not Al-Qaeda.

Originally posted by Chris 62
All out, and to the end, one front at a time.
Bush made this clear from the start.

Do you not see the inherent contradiction in terms? Probably not.

This is one of the problems with the current approach. If the world allows Pakistan to continue supporting Muslim terrorists in Kashmir then that support can easily be re-routed to Al-Qaeda.

Pakistan is the biggest challenge for the US. Many of its military officers have strong connections with Al-Qaeda and the Taliban. That means that Muslim terrorists have a safe country, albeit one where they have to keep a relatively low profile.

There are no easy answers for dealing with Pakistan and that is why at this point, the most effective aspect of the war against terrorism will be fought diplomatically and behind the scenes through intelligence work.

[Sikander]

Originally posted by Roland
I'd be very surprised to see the US acting against terrorist organisation that do not operate against US interests or even operate in line with US interests. That would be a level of consistency far beyond the reach of this administration.

And btw, do you really think the Pakistani government is not aiding the terrorists in Kashmir ?

Do you think that all organs of the Pakistani government are working together toward any sort of clearly defined goal? I don't, Pakistan like many countries is more like a medieval state than a modern nation state. There may only be one King, but there are many armies and a lot of the weapons in the country are pointed inward. We see the same sort of thing on a much smaller scale in every state, except in the West it tends to take form as legislative foot dragging by minority parties or bureacratic sabotage of policies which have been adopted but for whatever reason are rejected by the bureacracy.