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: Bilow who wrote (4877)	10/14/2001 7:46:30 PM
From: 2MAR$	Read Replies (3) \| Respond to of 281500

Carl , I think the article wasn't so much a rebuff of Sir Keegan , but a call to a kind of multi-faceted , intense kind of warfare upon terrorism ....that is relentless, fierce, covert & overt... & ruthless towards those who are the violent . In whatever country we find it . The latest anthrax incidents are just a distraction , the one possible horror is the deployment of a Nuclear device by these insane fanatics . What would our response be then ? That response should be our response now not "then". As you say , we have every tactical military technical advantage now , far surpassing any other country ...but we have to take even that up --->five more levels. On the contrary, the West should think of itself as the underdog, fighting against the clock, and seize the tactical initiative. It should act unpredictably, with the objective of confusing and disrupting an enemy who until now has chosen his targets at leisure. Rather than batter Afghanistan, whence any terrorist worth his Cemtex departed long ago, the West should act unexpectedly and without mercy against states which allow Al-Qaeda. There is no need to go into details here. Doing so now offers at least the chance of gaining the respect of the Islamic world. Failing to do so makes probable a gradual accumulation of failures. It means that the war will be Al-Qaeda's to lose. We were lucky with Hitler. We may not be so lucky again. We have the supreme thunderbolt poised and readied now , we can deploy wherever we need and it would be in the world's interest to use absolute power resolutely, with all cleverness, adroitly and bravely .... When you take out a cancer , you're goal is to remove every cell , in every part of the body....in this case it's the world . We have the power to do it , but do we have the will ? (You think they will hesitate to use a nuclear device if they have one ? They won't even bat-an-eye. Anthrax ? That's peanuts . And Pakistan should be disarmed ASAP . )