Mark, thank you for your post.
>>Do you think these guys give a sh*t what happens to innocent Afgans?
>While I share some of your concerns about our foreign policy in the Mid-East, I think you are wrong in your emphasis on this last count. These people do care about losing their war against the Northern Alliance. They want to continue in power. The potential of a devastating military attack which would unseat them would be quite unsavory.
FYI, Northern Alliance is dead, they got Massoud on Sunday. They posed as TV crew interviewing him and they blew themselves up taking Massoud with them. Northern Alliance without Massoud is like the local Boy Scouts.
A devastating military attack will likely not harm them. I am assuming you mean a bombing attack, they will likely pass their time in bunkers in the mountains. It will surely be devastating but it will hit the already bombed out infrastructure there after years of civil war. I think they are hoping for such action because they believe it will unleash the holy war they always wanted to fight, who knows, they are quite wackos! Ground invasion will take a very long time to prepare and it may become another Vietnam since they 'll be doing what they are good at, guerilla attacks from the mountains...So, difficult call.
>As for your concern about the collateral effects--the killing and maiming of innocents, ruining the economy, causing famine and disease--you are quite correct--those could easily happen. War is an ugly business. I can assure you that everyone we killed in World War II was not a rabid combatant. Sometimes you have to choose between two imperfect alternatives. Maybe you don't think this war is worth the likely side effects. That's fair; Vietnam wasn't worth the side effects. I happen to think this one is.
A concerted international effort to REALLY fight terorrism is needed and it will take years to succeed. Meanwhile, changing our foreign policy in that sorry part of the wordl will go a long way to achieve in suceeding to exterminate this monster.
>Incidentally I think your concern about our actions increasing the risk of additional terrorist attacks is well-founded. But I do believe that a strong, focused response now would reduce the effectiveness of terrorists--their ability to train and arm themselves, undisturbed. So I think that a firm ultimatum now would either be successful quickly or, if ignored by the Taliban and vigorously enforced by us, would serve as a strong deterrent to other regimes which harbor terrorists.
I hope you are right. Heck, eveyone expects a strong response anyway. It may very well succeed in impeding their ability to train and arm themselves and act as a strong deterrent. But, let's think about what just happened. We got a bunch of guys armed with knives and shaving material/cardboard cutters hijacking FOUR DOMESTIC planes and managing to PILOT them into the WTC and the Pentagon (one failed, no virgins for those guys) and managing to keep our intelligence and security with our pants down?. Do your really think these guys were trained how to fly Boeings in some mountain in Afganistan where even goats refuse to reside? I don't. We are talking about some really sleek people here who probably got tired of seeing their people (maybe own family members) treated in a manner that they decided to do something about it. Unfortunately, this nightmare scenario became reality. I hope a strong focused response will accomplish what you stated but, I am afraid, in the long term, it is a matter of time until the next mission of these assholes to make the date with the virgins in hell. Sad reality.
>None of this is meant to undermine your concerns about our mid-East policies--concerns which I share. But I think that we can simultaneously take a firm stand both on the importance of a just agreement between Israel and Palestine as well as on our willingness to go to war against terrorism.
I totally agree with your statement. The key word is JUST. Doing that will go a hell of whole lot more in fighting terrorism than any other measure.
IMHO of course.
Thanks again for your post Mark. |
