Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Foreign Affairs Discussion Group -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Ilaine who wrote (1650)	9/28/2001 1:16:01 PM
From: SirRealist	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 281500

soaw.org Yes, we train folks who are often outnumbered. The way to survive under such circumstances is to commit acts others describe as terrorism. Depends on who's spinning the story though. Some might call them freedom fighters. And no, we usually don't suggest they kill nuns and priests. We teach them how to kill effectively. If they happen to get creative in their targets... (shrug) ... c'est la vie. The government denies culpability and complicity. Who is to judge?

To: Ilaine who wrote (1650)	9/30/2001 10:29:46 PM
From: Dayuhan	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 281500

Hello, CB, it's been a while. Sorry this took so long; I've been out paddling.... There is a hint, and perhaps I am being hypersensitive, that it was/is US policy, covert, unspoken, or otherwise, to support and train people who commit unspeakable acts with the intention that these people would commit these unspeakable acts. In other words, we did not just arm the Contras, we suggested that they kill civilians. We did not just arm bin Laden, we suggested that he commit terrorism. We tread on shaky ground here, and we deal with policies and practices that many would rather we forget. To answer simply, I would say yes, I do believe that our policy was to encourage "unspeakable acts", both by "freedom fighters" that fought against regimes we disliked, and by states threatened by insurrections. I think this policy developed from two perceptions common at the time among the people who were managing our crusade against communism, perceptions we might do well to remember in our current crusade. One belief was that our defeat in Vietnam was caused largely by "tying the hands" of the military, particularly in dealing with civilian populations thought to be sympathetic to the enemy. The other was that the fight against communism was a simple matter of good vs. evil, and that this fight was sufficiently important that any means were justified to achieve victory. This latter perception is worth reviewing in light of current events, and in light of the characterizations now being tossed around. We do not have a collectively acceptable definition of evil, and I do not like to see that word being used in the development of policy. It just makes it too easy to decide that ends justify means. If all is permitted in a fight against evil, where are we? To Islamic fundamentalists, we are evil. Our aggressive export of secularism, democracy, and what even our own fundamentalists call "moral liberalism" threatens their values and their very way of life, and in their view is driving their people to moral corruption. Our pursuit of our economic interests, specifically access to the oil of the Middle East, drives us to frequent intervention in the politics of the region, intervention that is anathema to the fundamentalists. Our emotionally driven support for Israel places us on the side of a power that they see as the incarnation of evil. Obviously I disagree with these propositions, but I do not have access to any objective standard by which I may declare my perception of what is evil to be "right" and theirs to be "wrong". If I declare that my ends justify any means, and that all is permitted in a war of good against evil, I have to expect that those whose perceptions of evil are different from mine will do the same. The notion that ends justify means and all is permitted in a moral crusade has led to many deaths around the world. The victims of the US-approved Latin American death squads are among them, as are the victims of the Sept. 11 bombings. I hope we aren't planning to add too many to that grim total.