[Am-info] [Fwd: A mere nuisance?]

[Mark Hinds]

OK, I lied, I just can't let this one pass as if it were valid and
I was unable to respond to its incisive brilliance. I'll try harder
next time - promise - really.

Geoffrey wrote:
> My final word.... 
> "We have to get back to the place we were, where terrorists are not
> the focus of our lives but they're just a nuisance."
Actually it was from a New York Times piece. I'm sorry, but I basically
agree with it. Huffing and puffing about it is not likely to sway me, or
anyone else for that matter. At this point in time terrorism is such
pervasive world wide problem that war isn't going to work. We
need all the governments of the world to cooperate in a law enforcement
effort. If we do things which alienate other governments and inflame the
passions of the very people whom we need to moderate then I'd say
that's not a good plan. We won't be getting rid of terrorism anytime soon,
even your guy says that. Worst case terrorism may become a permanent fixture
of the modern world. I doubt that the invasion of Iraq was a positive step.

I'm sorry you've not persuaded me. Do really think that we don't consider
the points you made below? Do you think we're just head-in-the-sand ninnies?
That's how it comes across. Forgive me, but I'm inclined to think you're
simply trying to 'will' a complex problem into submission.

BTW
You left out the previous winner of the largest terror attack on
US soil - Timothy McVeigh. What war do you propose waging to fix
that one?

 > When exactly was terrorism ever a nuisance?
It's a nuisance in the same sense that drug crimes and drunk driving are,
both of which kill more people in the US than terrorist attacks. Perhaps
we should invade Columbia, or Mexico, or maybe Afghanistan - oh yeah we
did and now there's more opium coming out there than ever before. I think
at the very least we should have finished the job there before moving on
to Iraq.

> Just of few months ago, I wonder if the parents of the elementary
> school children, in Russia, who's kids were shot in the back for mere
> amusement and were forced to drink their own urine saw the terrorists
> as just a nuisance?
Interesting one. My wife is from Georgia and so I have an interesting
perspective. The Georgians are VERY concerned that the Russians will use
this as an excuse to annex a portion Georgia. Is that what you have in mind?
Of course Putin is shutting down the democracy over their and using
this event as an excuse. Should we do that here?

> Maybe the 1993 bombing of the World Trade Center tower or maybe the
> USS Cole?  Were they a nuisance then?
GW thought so "I'm tired of swatting flies". He wanted a comprehensive
plan. In the mean time we got bombed. I liked swatting flies better.

> I wonder if the relatives of the 259 people lost in the 1988 bombing
> of Pan Am flight 103 in Lockerby Scotland saw terrorist as a
> nuisance?
Well, we didn't invade Libya then did we. I suppose one could argue
that the Iraq invasion motivated Q'daffi Duck to play nice, but I
suspect that years of isolation and  Afghanistan would have been
sufficient. No way to tell now.

> Maybe it was the hijacking of cruise ship Achille Lauro in 1985 when
> the terrorist killed Leon Klinghoffer, a 69-year-old wheelchair bound
> disabled American tourist and through him overboard (wheelchair and
> all) in front of his screaming wife.  Were they a nuisance then?

Last I heard that was Palestinians - You left out the 240 US Marines
killed in lebanon. I'm not even sure who that was. Again, I wager that
more Americans were killed by crime than terrorists back then. And just
like crime, there no specific adversary to declare war on.

> Does the State of Israel think of terrorist as a mere nuisance when
> terrorists continually send homicide bombers into crowded markets or
> city buses and kill scores and scores of innocent men, women and
> children?
Their occupation isn't working to well is it? Would you have
them exterminate the Palestinians? Should the US? Note also
that the Palestinians experience about a 3 to 1 kill ratio
owing to Israeli retaliations. Yes, the Palestinian approach is
more loony to me, but dead is dead - I doubt the Palestinians
see it that way, so unless the Israelis like what's going on they'd
better figure out a new plan. Maybe the wall will work, it seems
better than military retaliation, but still not much of a solution.
Hey, I've got an Idear! Maybe its COMLPICATED and no quick, simple
solution exists.

> Let this be a warning for voters this year.  John Kerry hasn't got a
> clue who the enemy is.
In Your Humble Opinion. IMHO GW doesn't have a clue - PERIOD
Not very helpful, was that?

> He has the philosophy of Neville Chamberlain
> that if you just put your head in the sand and ignore them, they will go away.
Well, you've certainly convinced me. Proof by unsubstantiated assertion does
it for me every time. I'm willing to bet that if the Iraqi's had been marching
all over the middle east and we did what the Allies did to the germans in WWII
then the Iraqi's might chill. However it seems obvious enough to me that the
situation is vastly different and the comparison absurd.


> He doesn't realize, these monsters want Republicans and Democrats dead.
Well at least they're equal opportunity offenders, which is more than I can
say for your boss, but at least Bush doesn't actually want to kill us (Democrats),
he merely wishes to treat us as if we were dead.

This is so silly. Of course he knows what we're up against. Even your ding dong
dufus knows that somebody out there is after us - He just doesn't seem to know who.

You've made your points, and I don't agree. If you think that I'm not concerned
then you're mistaken, willfully so. I have no doubt that you're concerned, I simply
don't think you have the slightest clue what to do, or at least you're unable to
articulate your views in an effective way. I wasn't all that happy with the choice
of Kerry back in March (Dean-head), but I spent time reading and watching Kerry's
history (Frontline - damn liberal crap!!!). I like what I see and I agree more
with his stated policies that GW's. Please accept my apolgies if I have not
taken adequate steps to eduacte myself, but its too

Think before you vote this year.
I'd certainly say the same to you, but then that would be condescending;
As if I knew better than all those who disagree with me.

Mark