standing for peace

[Moridin]

Originally posted by skywalker: This was reported on some news show that the CIA was not supposed to deal with these types of people. I think this happened 6-8 years ago! Anyone else see this? Either that or I've been dreaming! Mark

The CIA cannot pay money (or 'hire') anyone that has committed a crime or is intending to commit a crime (i.e. terrorists). This law has been in effect for some time, but will probably be revoked considering the recent events.


------------------


Never try to teach a pig to sing; it wastes your time and it annoys the pig
I've got to admit it's getting better, it's getting better all the time
Bossman of Better Funny Stuff.....of the Laughing Hyenas!

[250]

the logic behind bin Laden's terroism is:

to use controled methodes teorrize those who are threats to his nation

(you can check out his interview in 1998)

If US, is proven to be no threat but a friend to Muslim world, then terroism will have no justification even in the eyes of a muslim. It will somehow die out on its own... of course, we can awlays speed things up a little

[Silver Cheetah]

Originally posted by Moridin: In actuality we do spend a lot on intelligence, but recently (last 10 years) the spending has been drastically reduced. The problem then is what do you spend the money on...electronic or human intelligence. We have gone the way of electronic intelligence and even the top people (director of intelligence...) are saying that was the wrong way to go. I think it would be extremely hard to infiltrate bin Laden's group. It is sure death if one is caught, unlike other 'spies' that may just face jail or imprisonment while the countries work out a deal for release. Now in response to the 'peace' notion. We are dealing with terrorists that have proven time and again that they are willing to kill without regard to civilians/military/men/women/or children. While a peaceful solution, of course, is ideal, in this context it is out of the question. Terrorists kill and destroy...there are no ifs ands or buts about that. They will not negotiate, they will not attend 'talks' or 'summits'...they kill! The only way to deal with them is to attack and destroy them. If we sit back and try to solve this in a civalized manner then we are all but dead. I for one do not want my government to try and reason with these people, b/c it cannot be done. Do you want to get on an airplane, or attend a huge gathering, or take a job in a large office complex, while your government sits back and tries to negotiate with barbarians? I don't!! Barbarians only understand death and destruction and that is what needs to be dealt to them...not a nice letter pleasantly asking that they don't kill any more people and turn themselves in

The British press are quoting a figure of $30 billion on intelligence. Are you telling me that it used to be MORE than that? Well, landsakes and lordy me!

Re the problems associated with infiltration, well, yes, obviously! I don't think it's just bin Laden's group who would deal out certain death if an interloper were discovered in the ranks, I think most infiltrated organisations would, unless they thought they could 'turn' the agent to spy on his masters. I still don't see why that makes it not an option. There are plenty of men willing to die for their country, doesn't it make sense to risk your life for a cause that might save the lives of millions?

Re peace - we can talk about this til we're blue in the face. Essentially, America and Pakistan between them created the Taliban, who have been oppressing the country they rule since they first seized power. To call them a bunch of bastards is to radically understate the case.

I am all in favour of getting rid of the Taliban (although as I say, it would have been better had they not been created in the first place). Their list of human rights abuses is long, and they have finished off the job of completely f*cking up Afghanistan, (not that there was a lot left after the Soviets et al finished with it.

I agree that some action must be taken - however, forget all this ridiculous and overblown talk of war. What happened was a crime against humanity and should be dealt with as such. What is required is the support of the security council, clear and objective proof of guilt to be established, and the (armed) response to comply with international law. OF COURSE action must be taken, but we need a global response, not America marching off and doing its own unilateral thang, yet again!! (I believe there is a problem in that terrorist acts cannot be classed as crimes against humanity, only acts committed by states can. This is rubbish, and needs to be changed.)

Last but not least, what makes you think that moving against Afghanistan is going to solve the problem of terrorism? IT ISN'T!!!! It's just going to piss off large sections of the Middle East, and cause riot and unrest, if not outright war. Pakistan is in a terrible state already, they are fighting in the streets for god's sake! Some want America to go in, many do not. So they're fighting about it. Looks to me like a microcosm of what might soon be happening on a much larger scale.




------------------

[Moridin]

Originally posted by Fljotsdale: Moridin, while I understand your viewpoint, and to some extent share it, you must realise that any MILITARY action will cause the deaths of very many innocent people - far more than were killed in the airplane attacks. Even if it is PROVED that bin Laden was behind it - and it hasn't been yet - the Afghani people as a whole cannot be held responsible for him and his terrorists. YET IS THESE PEOPLE who will suffer in any military action. You can be sure bin Laden and his followers are in a place of safety. The ONLY sensible thing to do is to try and make the Taliban see reason and hand him and his people over to justice - INDEPENDANT justice: NOT US justice. NOT UK justice. NOT European justice. He should be tried by combined Western/Eastern juctice, including Russian and China. That way we stand a chance of coming out of this with no more damage.

Do you know what the situation is like for the peaceful people of Afghanastan? They are already dying, they are living in deplorable conditions, women have no access to healthcare, girls are not allowed to attend school after the age of twelve, people buy food, intended for livestock, to feed their family. The 'western' world gave money to build a soccer stadium in Kabul...the stadium was built but it is used for executions more than for soccer. I don't know where in my post that I said we should kill the innocent civilians. I never said we should bomb their entire country. I never said that we should kill everything and everyone without regard. We need to be 'careful' in our attack, but we cannot realistically expect zero casualties. The Taliban is an oppresive regime and they are harboring a known terrorist. If they are willing to do this then they must be willing to accept the consequences.

And the talk that it has not been proven that bin Laden is behind this is ridiculous. Every single identified hijacker had proven links to his network, he has declared a holy war with the US, it was proven that he funded and directed the attacks on 1)the US embassies in Africa 2)the US Kohl(sp) destroyer 3)the US special forces in Somalia and 4)the WTC bombings of 1993...who else would commit these attacks? If it were another group and they made it look like bin Laden's network, then I think we should be a bit more worried, b/c then we have at least 2 highly trained and well funded groups who want to destroy the western world!


------------------


Never try to teach a pig to sing; it wastes your time and it annoys the pig
I've got to admit it's getting better, it's getting better all the time
Bossman of Better Funny Stuff.....of the Laughing Hyenas!

[250]

Originally posted by Moridin: Do you know what the situation is like for the peaceful people of Afghanastan? They are already dying, they are living in deplorable conditions, women have no access to healthcare, girls are not allowed to attend school after the age of twelve, people buy food, intended for livestock, to feed their family. The 'western' world gave money to build a soccer stadium in Kabul...the stadium was built but it is used for executions more than for soccer. I don't know where in my post that I said we should kill the innocent civilians. I never said we should bomb their entire country. I never said that we should kill everything and everyone without regard. We need to be 'careful' in our attack, but we cannot realistically expect zero casualties. The Taliban is an oppresive regime and they are harboring a known terrorist. If they are willing to do this then they must be willing to accept the consequences.

so you are, once again, picturing yourself as a "savior"

they are already dying does not mean we should go in and speed it up


[This message has been edited by 250 (edited 09-23-2001).]

[Silver Cheetah]

Originally posted by 250: [B] they are already dying does not mean we should go in and speed it up B]

Moridin, the problem I have, like most people, is that America is approaching Afghanistan with enough major hardware to pulverize a continent. If the Taliban didn't know you were coming, they sure do now!! Is this an intelligent way to go about ridding the world of terrorism? No it isn't! The big boys will all push off to a safer place (as leaders have done since time immemorial) whilst their men (often conscripted under protest) will be doing their dirty work.

Why couldn't a quieter approach have been used? This looks like you're just trying to frighten the hell out of them, and appease the American people's need for redress - well, you'll succeed in those objectives, but where does that get us in eradicating terrorism? Nowhere! It just seems bloody stupid to me. When an animal knows it's being hunted, it runs for it. If bin Laden is even still in the country, I'd be very surprised. He's not stupid, you know! Is he just going to sit about on his arse waiting for you lot to shoot at him? No, he isn't, is he?

In 1997, Clinton got an operation together, targeting Peshawar, to capture bin Laden. When he heard about it, he moved to Kandahar. 1998, Clinton launched 70 cruise missiles on his training camps in an attempt to get bin Laden. Did he get him? Did he hell. So why is this time going to be any different? You're just going to stir up the middle east hotter than a nest of hornets, and kill a load of civilians into the bargain. Plus ca change, plus ca la meme chose.


------------------

[tracey]

america is unfortunately not actually helping itself at the moment. more and more people are beginning to see the dreadful and extreme loss of life that is going to occur if she is allowed to have her way. negotiation without this mad escalation of arms and threats will at least calm the situation down somewhat. the governments of the middle east are feeling understandably very threatened, and america merely reinforcing its position as a bullyboy who will overeact if others' don't comply. she is behaving like a spoiled child who has no regard for the consequences because she believes she is in control. well, she isn't. once the ball starts rolling 'control' will be but a dream concept.

i can't get my head around why this isn't sinking in.

[skywalker]

Picture it.

George Bush in a sandbox with toy tanks and jets and little soldiers! "Oh boy, soon I'll get to play with the real thing!"

Edit: Ooops, forgot the smilie so's you'd know I was pokin' fun!


Mark

[This message has been edited by skywalker (edited 09-23-2001).]

[Kaz]

Originally posted by tracey: america is unfortunately not actually helping itself at the moment. more and more people are beginning to see the dreadful and extreme loss of life that is going to occur if she is allowed to have her way. negotiation without this mad escalation of arms and threats will at least calm the situation down somewhat. the governments of the middle east are feeling understandably very threatened, and america merely reinforcing its position as a bullyboy who will overeact if others' don't comply. she is behaving like a spoiled child who has no regard for the consequences because she believes she is in control. well, she isn't. once the ball starts rolling 'control' will be but a dream concept. i can't get my head around why this isn't sinking in.

I agree fully. What America is doing seems so obvious. I can't believe that bin Laden is stupid enough not to have prepared for this situation. What is happening now will do far more harm than good. A great time to be a pacifist, this is.

------------------


Kazara

Sapphire Dragoness of ALSB
Waitress at Cloudy's Cafe

[Fljotsdale]

bin Laden and people like him will be SO happy to see this build-up of military force. Does anyone think that people like him are worried by it? Does anyone think he CARES about the Afghans, or the Pakistanis or ANYONE? Of course not. This overreaction is JUST what he was looking for. When the US, with the rest of the West backing it up, actually attacks Afghanistan and 'accidentally' kills inocent women and children - as they will - then look to ALL the East turning against us. Fun, huh?

------------------