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: Dayuhan who wrote (57458)	11/16/2002 9:26:10 PM
From: Brumar89	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 281500

We should always remember, when discussing military response, the time-honored terrorist progression. The terrorists attack, expecting and intending to generate a military response. They then disperse their assets among a civilian population, ensuring that the military response will involve collateral damage. They then use that collateral damage to recruit more terrorists and to stir up world opinion against the attacking power. They repeat the process until the patience of the attacking power is worn down. This line of reasoning could be used to support a policy of never retaliating against terror attacks. I'm sure that's not what you're supporting though. I think we were right to demand the Afghan government hand over the leadership of Al Qaida and use military force against them when they refused. Even though there was some unintentional collateral damage. I think that's why Pakistan and Yemen are cooperating closely with us in the fight against terrorist forces operating in their nations.