SI
SI
discoversearch

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 : Sharks in the Septic Tank -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?


To: Neocon who wrote (38566)11/24/2001 12:07:35 PM
From: Lane3  Read Replies (2) | Respond to of 82486
 
Even were he to engage in stealth, the targeting of military outposts would be an improvement.

Like what? What military outpost would even slow down the great Western machine?

Bin Laden ought to be waging a guerilla war against Saudi Arabia or some other state, in order to establish a vanguard for promoting Islamic revolution in other states.

I agree with that. It would be a better strategy to consolidate Islam now and fight the USA later once all the Islamic ducks are lined up. I imagine that he does what he does more out of frustration and impatience than strategy. (Which, IMO, is an argument in favor of the coward side, as frustration and impatience run counter to courage.) The 9-11 attack, while surely giving him enormous satisfaction, will prove a pyrric victory. If you're going to take a shot at goliath, you'd better finish him off, not just piss him off.

Karen



To: Neocon who wrote (38566)11/26/2001 3:09:15 PM
From: TimF  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 82486
 
If the United States were ever attacked, it should be on the front line, to try to drive out troops, ships, and logistical support in the area.

Well that certainly would not be the act of a coward. I think one would have to either be brave, or a fool, to take on the US military.

Tim