If this "War on Terrorism" is to be realized it is important that all terrorist groups in the world are dealt with. It is understandable that America needs to go after the Taliban and bring Osama Bin Laden to justice, but in order to justify a war against terrorism other groups must also be targetted.

Sri Lanka for instance has been fighting a bloody civil war since 1985 in which a terrorist group called JUTE has been largely responsible for civilian death in Sri Lanka.

The IRA (Irish Republic Army)UFF (Ulster Freedom Fighters), and many other terrorist groups in Northern Ireland have been bombing busses, burning houses, killing children, and many other horendous acts of violence. Can you imagine US troops invading Northern Ireland to deal with the terrorist problems? It simply would not happen. But why would it not happen? The answer is that Ireland is a white, catholic/protestant, wealthy country. It would be unspeakable to drop bombs on such a country. I realize, however, that Afghanistan is in a much worse condition with an extremly oppresive government, but at the same time George W. Bush has promised to attack terrorism everywhere. So when is the US going to live up to that promise.

There is also the terrorist attacks on the subway in Japan. I forget the name of the group that is responsible for that, and I know nothing about this history.

Also the constant struggle between the PLO and Isreal has claimed enough lives. Yet the US seems to favour Isreal in the conflict, especially after recent events. I dont think we will ever live long enough to see American troops walk into Jerusalem to end terrorism.

My point is that all terrorism in the world does need to be dealt with harshly. George Bush has made a promise to attack terrorism on all fronts, however I do not believe he can come through with his promise unless his definition of terrorism is only terrorism that affects US citizens.

Just my opinion though

The examples that you cite are terrorists within their own countries. The U.S., U.N., or any other foreign body would have to be invited to take part in the fun. Unless of course the terrorists were to attack someone outside their boundaries, in which case it becomes another matter.
EDIT: Just read your last post in the other thread, so now I think I understand where you're coming from a little better. In light of that, I'm editing this post.

------------------
http://sc.communities.msn.com/tn/02/...Site/2/17e.jpg
Perversion is the true spice of life: Variety is just part of a healthy diet.

[This message has been edited by Absynthe (edited 10-12-2001).]

The IRA has been to America on "fund raising" trips to many corperations raising money for their political wing Sin Fein. Sin Fein is a political party lead by Gerry Adams with direct connections to the IRA. While you are right the examples that I gave show terrorism that is not on American soil, that is becuase America has shown no interest in stopping terrorism in these areas of the world. (With the execption of Palestine/Isreal). Bill Clinton made many attempts and was quite succesful at garnering peace in Ireland. But this diplomacy did not effect the terrorists directly and therfore no action was taken. If America clearly takes Isreals side, do you think it would be long before the PLO started terrorizing Americans? It is everyones responsibility to stop terrorism. This is not a race issue it is an inequality in the worlds resources that has led to this.

I think you hit it directly on the head: inequality is the root cause of most conflict. To clarify my point on other countries getting involved, I was looking only at the military aspect. Certainly it is appropriate for other nations to get involved in the peacemaking process in a political way if it is feasible.
I would venture that what is happening in Ireland, Sri Lanka, et. al. should really be classified as a civil war with terrorist or guerrila tactics being employed. As compared to making war on a separate nation or people.