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 : War -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Thomas M. who wrote (7790)	10/29/2001 8:36:39 PM
From: Brumar89	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 23908

Hey, if you can convince me that Israel will use whatever weapons they have against us, I will be in favor of bombing them to prevent that. Iraq and Al Qaida, on the other hand, will use whatever weapons of mass destruction they are able to acquire or develop against us for sure. I know it, you know it, everybody knows it. We better do whatever it takes to stop them before a lot more Americans are murdered! And don't forget, Thomas - you could be a victim yourself next time. Let me see if you can answer this question seriously - who do you think is more likely to kill YOU in a terrorist act - A) Israel or B) Osama bin Ladin's boys?

To: Thomas M. who wrote (7790)	10/29/2001 10:22:44 PM
From: Ben Wa	Respond to of 23908

This comes from Tamim, a writer and columnist in San Francisco, who comes > from Afghanistan. > > >I've been hearing a lot of talk about "bombing Afghanistan back to the > >Stone Age." Ronn Owens, on KGO Talk Radio today, allowed that this would > >mean killing innocent people, people who had nothing to do with this > >atrocity, but "we're at war, we have to accept collateral damage. What > else > >can we do?" Minutes later I heard some TV pundit discussing whether we > >"have the belly to do what must be done." > > > >And I thought about the issues being raised especially hard because I am > >from Afghanistan, and even though I've lived here for 35 years I've > >never lost track of what's going on there. So I want to tell anyone who > >will listen how it all looks from where I'm standing. > > > >I speak as one who hates the Taliban and Osama Bin Laden. There is no > doubt > >in my mind that these people were responsible for the atrocity in New > York. > >I agree that something must be done about those monsters. > > > >But the Taliban and Ben Laden are not Afghanistan. They're not even the > >government of Afghanistan. The Taliban are a cult of ignorant > >psychotics who took over Afghanistan in 1997. Bin Laden is a political > >criminal with a plan. When you think Taliban, think Nazis. When you think > > >Bin Laden,think Hitler. And when you think "the people of Afghanistan" > >think "the Jews in the concentration camps." > > > >It's not only that the Afghan people had nothing to do with this > atrocity. > >They were the first victims of the perpetrators. They would exult if > >someone would come in there, take out the Taliban and clear out the rats > >nest of international thugs holed up in their country. > > > >Some say, why don't the Afghans rise up and overthrow the Taliban? The > >answer is, they're starved, exhausted, hurt, incapacitated, suffering. A > >few years ago, the United Nations estimated that there are 500,000 > disabled > >orphans in Afghanistan--a country with no economy, no food. There are > >millions of widows. And the Taliban has been burying these widows alive > >in mass graves. The soil is littered with land mines, the farms were all > >destroyed by the Soviets. These are a few of the reasons why the Afghan > >people have not overthrown the Taliban. > > > >We come now to the question of bombing Afghanistan back to the Stone > >Age.Trouble is, that's been done. The Soviets took care of it already. > Make > >the Afghans suffer? They're already suffering. Level their houses? Done. > >Turn their schools into piles of rubble? Done. Eradicate their hospitals? > > >Done. Destroy their infrastructure? Cut them off from medicine and health > > >care? Too late. Someone already did all that. > > > >New bombs would only stir the rubble of earlier bombs. Would they at > >least get the Taliban? Not likely. In today's Afghanistan, only the > Taliban > >eat, only they have the means to move around. They'd slip away and hide. > >Maybe the bombs would get some of those disabled orphans, they don't move > > >too fast, they don't even have wheelchairs. But flying over Kabul and > >dropping bombs wouldn't really be a strike against the criminals who did > >this horrific thing. Actually it would only be making common cause with > >the Taliban--by raping once again the people they've been raping all this > time. > > > >So what else is there? What can be done, then? Let me now speak with true > > >fear and trembling. The only way to get Bin Laden is to go in there with > >ground troops. When people speak of "having the belly to do what needs to > > >be done" they're thinking in terms of having the belly to kill as many as > > >needed. Having the belly to overcome any moral qualms about killing > >innocent people. > > > >Let's pull our heads out of the sand. What's actually on the table is > >Americans dying. And not just because some Americans would die fighting > >their way through Afghanistan to Bin Laden's hideout. It's much bigger > >than that folks. Because to get any troops to Afghanistan, we'd have to > go > >through Pakistan. Would they let us? Not likely. The conquest of Pakistan > > would have to be first. Will other Muslim nations just stand by? You see > where I'm going. We're flirting with a world war between Islam and the > West. > > > >And guess what: that's Bin Laden's program. That's exactly what he > >wants. That's why he did this. Read his speeches and statements. It's all > > >right there. He really believes Islam would beat the west. It might seem > >ridiculous, but he figures if he can polarize the world into Islam and > the > >West, he's got a billion soldiers. If the west wreaks a holocaust in > those > >lands, that's a billion people with nothing left to lose, that's even > >better from Bin Laden's point of view. He's probably wrong, in the end > the > West would win, whatever that would mean, but the war would last for years > > and millions would die, not just theirs but ours. Who has the belly for > that? > > > >Bin Laden does. Anyone else? > > > >Tamim Ansary

To: Thomas M. who wrote (7790)	10/29/2001 10:24:13 PM
From: Ben Wa	Respond to of 23908

This comes from Tamim, a writer and columnist in San Francisco, who comes > from Afghanistan. > > >I've been hearing a lot of talk about "bombing Afghanistan back to the > >Stone Age." Ronn Owens, on KGO Talk Radio today, allowed that this would > >mean killing innocent people, people who had nothing to do with this > >atrocity, but "we're at war, we have to accept collateral damage. What > else > >can we do?" Minutes later I heard some TV pundit discussing whether we > >"have the belly to do what must be done." > > > >And I thought about the issues being raised especially hard because I am > >from Afghanistan, and even though I've lived here for 35 years I've > >never lost track of what's going on there. So I want to tell anyone who > >will listen how it all looks from where I'm standing. > > > >I speak as one who hates the Taliban and Osama Bin Laden. There is no > doubt > >in my mind that these people were responsible for the atrocity in New > York. > >I agree that something must be done about those monsters. > > > >But the Taliban and Ben Laden are not Afghanistan. They're not even the > >government of Afghanistan. The Taliban are a cult of ignorant > >psychotics who took over Afghanistan in 1997. Bin Laden is a political > >criminal with a plan. When you think Taliban, think Nazis. When you think > > >Bin Laden,think Hitler. And when you think "the people of Afghanistan" > >think "the Jews in the concentration camps." > > > >It's not only that the Afghan people had nothing to do with this > atrocity. > >They were the first victims of the perpetrators. They would exult if > >someone would come in there, take out the Taliban and clear out the rats > >nest of international thugs holed up in their country. > > > >Some say, why don't the Afghans rise up and overthrow the Taliban? The > >answer is, they're starved, exhausted, hurt, incapacitated, suffering. A > >few years ago, the United Nations estimated that there are 500,000 > disabled > >orphans in Afghanistan--a country with no economy, no food. There are > >millions of widows. And the Taliban has been burying these widows alive > >in mass graves. The soil is littered with land mines, the farms were all > >destroyed by the Soviets. These are a few of the reasons why the Afghan > >people have not overthrown the Taliban. > > > >We come now to the question of bombing Afghanistan back to the Stone > >Age.Trouble is, that's been done. The Soviets took care of it already. > Make > >the Afghans suffer? They're already suffering. Level their houses? Done. > >Turn their schools into piles of rubble? Done. Eradicate their hospitals? > > >Done. Destroy their infrastructure? Cut them off from medicine and health > > >care? Too late. Someone already did all that. > > > >New bombs would only stir the rubble of earlier bombs. Would they at > >least get the Taliban? Not likely. In today's Afghanistan, only the > Taliban > >eat, only they have the means to move around. They'd slip away and hide. > >Maybe the bombs would get some of those disabled orphans, they don't move > > >too fast, they don't even have wheelchairs. But flying over Kabul and > >dropping bombs wouldn't really be a strike against the criminals who did > >this horrific thing. Actually it would only be making common cause with > >the Taliban--by raping once again the people they've been raping all this > time. > > > >So what else is there? What can be done, then? Let me now speak with true > > >fear and trembling. The only way to get Bin Laden is to go in there with > >ground troops. When people speak of "having the belly to do what needs to > > >be done" they're thinking in terms of having the belly to kill as many as > > >needed. Having the belly to overcome any moral qualms about killing > >innocent people. > > > >Let's pull our heads out of the sand. What's actually on the table is > >Americans dying. And not just because some Americans would die fighting > >their way through Afghanistan to Bin Laden's hideout. It's much bigger > >than that folks. Because to get any troops to Afghanistan, we'd have to > go > >through Pakistan. Would they let us? Not likely. The conquest of Pakistan > > would have to be first. Will other Muslim nations just stand by? You see > where I'm going. We're flirting with a world war between Islam and the > West. > > > >And guess what: that's Bin Laden's program. That's exactly what he > >wants. That's why he did this. Read his speeches and statements. It's all > > >right there. He really believes Islam would beat the west. It might seem > >ridiculous, but he figures if he can polarize the world into Islam and > the > >West, he's got a billion soldiers. If the west wreaks a holocaust in > those > >lands, that's a billion people with nothing left to lose, that's even > >better from Bin Laden's point of view. He's probably wrong, in the end > the > West would win, whatever that would mean, but the war would last for years > > and millions would die, not just theirs but ours. Who has the belly for > that? > > > >Bin Laden does. Anyone else? > > > >Tamim Ansary

To: Thomas M. who wrote (7790)	10/30/2001 3:58:56 AM
From: GUSTAVE JAEGER	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 23908

Quite an interesting paper! Personally, I've no doubts that (pro-)Israeli extremists are behind the anthrax scare: it started right after Prez GW Bush spoke about a "Palestinian state" and the targets just don't fit a far-right/supremacist pattern either.... Qaida Link to Anthrax Is Unlikely, Officials Say Bob Woodward and Dan Eggen Washington Post Service Monday, October 29, 2001 FBI and CIA Believe Attacks Could Be Work Of Domestic Extremists WASHINGTON Top FBI and CIA officials say they believe the anthrax attacks on Washington, New York and Florida are most likely the work of one or more extremists in the United States who are probably not connected to Osama bin Laden's Qaida terrorist organization, according to government officials. [snip] iht.com US right-wing extremists (as T. McVeigh) hate "big-government-with-a-big-stick", alright. But then, the current bioterror strikes have drawn the US towards EVEN MORE big-government!! The FBI and the newly-created Home Defense Office (Ridge) have been vested with far-reaching powers. The CIA's "license to kill" has been reinstated. Federal authorities have an increased latitude to supervise/micro-manage local authorities all across the country... So, was that the political outcome our allegedly far-rightist bioterrorists had in mind?! Besides, tell me how anchormen like Tom Brokaw represent the US Federal Govt?? Are ABC, NBC, and CBS owned by the government?? Even so, I'd expect those Aryan nuts to send their anthrax letters to people like Oprah Winfrey or Senator Lieberman or Mayor Giuliani or... you name it.