The "War" model

[Diogenes Of Pumpkintown]

Originally posted by Yorick: Dio, you're missing the reality that Bin Ladens actions are justified under the Talibans interpretation of their laws. Would the USA extradite two Americans who had sex without being married in Kabul? The punishment is 100 lashes. Would the US hand them over for breaking Islamic law if they were already back safe in America?

So what are you saying? That we should declare War and bomb the hell out of Afghanistan, or maybe invade it? That is the War model you are defending as the better approach.

[Yorick]

Originally posted by Diogenes Of Pumpkintown: So what are you saying? That we should declare War and bomb the hell out of Afghanistan, or maybe invade it? That is the War model you are defending as the better approach.

Absolutely not. Diogenes, I am defending this:

This war will not be like the war against Iraq a decade ago, with a decisive liberation of territory and a swift conclusion.■■It will not look like the air war above Kosovo two years ago, where no ground troops were used and not a single American was lost in combat.

Our response involves far more than instant retaliation and isolated strikes.■■Americans should not expect one battle, but a lengthy campaign, unlike any other we have ever seen.■■It may include dramatic strikes, visible on TV, and covert operations, secret even in success.■■We will starve terrorists of funding, turn them one against another, drive them from place to place, until there is no refuge or no rest.■■And we will pursue nations that provide aid or safe haven to terrorism.■■Every nation, in every region, now has a decision to make. Either you are with us, or you are with the terrorists............ the only way to defeat terrorism as a threat to our way of life is to stop it, eliminate it, and destroy it where it grows.■


This is also good. Disperses the "West vs Islam" scenario:
I also want to speak tonight directly to Muslims throughout the world.■■We respect your faith.■■It's practiced freely by many millions of Americans, and by millions more in countries that America counts as friends.■■Its teachings are good and peaceful, and those who commit evil in the name of Allah blaspheme the name of Allah.■■(Applause.)■■The terrorists are traitors to their own faith, trying, in effect, to hijack Islam itself.■■The enemy of America is not our many Muslim friends; it is not our many Arab friends.■■Our enemy is a radical network of terrorists, and every government that supports them.■

------------------
I am the walrus!.... er, no hang on....

A fair dinkum laughing Hyena!

[Yorick]

You know, I'm not defending any course of action as "right". I'm stating a reality. There is a war, but it is the one above, not what you are anticipating Diogenes. Bombing will do nothing.

The key words I read are "starve them of funding" and "turn them against each other".

But War it is.

------------------
I am the walrus!.... er, no hang on....

A fair dinkum laughing Hyena!

[Diogenes Of Pumpkintown]

Originally posted by Yorick: Our response involves far more than instant retaliation and isolated strikes.■■Americans should not expect one battle, but a lengthy campaign, unlike any other we have ever seen.■■It may include dramatic strikes, visible on TV, and covert operations, secret even in success.■■We will starve terrorists of funding, turn them one against another, drive them from place to place, until there is no refuge or no rest.■■And we will pursue nations that provide aid or safe haven to terrorism.■■Every nation, in every region, now has a decision to make. Either you are with us, or you are with the terrorists............ the only way to defeat terrorism as a threat to our way of life is to stop it, eliminate it, and destroy it where it grows.■ [/B]

Frankly it puzzles me how you view this as Bush showing restraint in purpose.

I read it to mean that he intends to go all out on this crusade, and will certainly use the military as one of MANY means in the war.

Oh yes, we will have "dramatic strikes, visible on TV"!

As soon as coalition forces breech the air/ground space of afganistan or any other rogue state, its a war with another nation. They will defend the country they stole, like most other nations would and The Taliban have stated so. (I must exclude tibet, the epitame of peacful co-existance, which is still occupied by china, those bastards!!!!!!!) No doubt about the Jargon, If we after Bin Ladin, we go to war. Mr. Bush can't back out of it or he will lose face on the world stage. He either follows through, or puts his foot in his mouth.

------------------
Peace be with you

[Yorick]

Originally posted by Diogenes Of Pumpkintown: Frankly it puzzles me how you view this as Bush showing restraint in purpose. I read it to mean that he intends to go all out on this crusade, and will certainly use the military as one of MANY means in the war. Oh yes, we will have "dramatic strikes, visible on TV"!

How can you read that and come to that conclusion? Diogenes, calm down. This is not the end of the world. Israelis and Irish live with this stuff. If Nukes are fired at the USA you can bet Manhattan - where I am - will be first aim. You can't worry about this stuff.

He diffused the "crusade" distanced himself from a war on Islam. There is a lot of blustering at the moment. Show of force, intimidation tactics. Like two cats, or two single humans before a fight.

It is very possible that we will not see televised military action. The Russians have loaned intelligence. They lost a ten year war remember, and they were next door. The US aren't going to make the same mistake. You can't fight conventionally against this enemy.

------------------
I am the walrus!.... er, no hang on....

A fair dinkum laughing Hyena!

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

[Yorick]

Originally posted by G'kar: As soon as coalition forces breech the air/ground space of afganistan or any other rogue state, its a war with another nation. They will defend the country they stole, like most other nations would and The Taliban have stated so. (I must exclude tibet, the epitame of peacful co-existance, which is still occupied by china, those bastards!!!!!!!) No doubt about the Jargon, If we after Bin Ladin, we go to war. Mr. Bush can't back out of it or he will lose face on the world stage. He either follows through, or puts his foot in his mouth.

Oh come on. Lose face? American lives are worth more political weight than international face. If Bush was worried about face he wouldn't have tossed out Kyoto in favour of the "nonegotiable" American way of life.

Bush is a human. Can we remember that please? Most humans with our educational perspective have at least some value on human life.



------------------
I am the walrus!.... er, no hang on....

A fair dinkum laughing Hyena!

[Diogenes Of Pumpkintown]

Originally posted by Yorick: How can you read that and come to that conclusion? Diogenes, calm down. This is not the end of the world. Israelis and Irish live with this stuff. If Nukes are fired at the USA you can bet Manhattan - where I am - will be first aim. You can't worry about this stuff. He diffused the "crusade" distanced himself from a war on Islam. There is a lot of blustering at the moment. Show of force, intimidation tactics. Like two cats, or two single humans before a fight. It is very possible that we will not see televised military action. The Russians have loaned intelligence. They lost a ten year war remember, and they were next door. The US aren't going to make the same mistake. You can't fight conventionally against this enemy.

Okay, well all I can say is I hope you are right, but you have more faith in the wisdom of my gov't and its leaders than I do.

[The_ Fur_Cough]

Originally posted by Yorick: It is very possible that we will not see televised military action. The Russians have loaned intelligence. They lost a ten year war remember, and they were next door. The US aren't going to make the same mistake. You can't fight conventionally against this enemy.

There has already been military action. According to BBC radio reports this morning (GMT) SAS troops have been in firefights with the Taliban. Incidentally, the Taliban aren't strictly (or at least haven't been proven to be ) the enemy per se and in their war with Russia they were aided and abbetted by the SAS, this time they are up against them. I do feel a little sorry for them, this won't be like the affair with Russia.


------------------
Aaahh.... Fur Cough.

Originally posted by Yorick: Oh come on. Lose face? American lives are worth more political weight than international face. If Bush was worried about face he wouldn't have tossed out Kyoto in favour of the "nonegotiable" American way of life. Bush is a human. Can we remember that please? Most humans with our educational perspective have at least some value on human life.

Good point, He would lose alot of "face" at home if the polls indicate anything.
The voters at home are what counts to any elected official. And the current polls indicate a substanial degree of tolerance for U.S. casualties , Now if or when these causalties actually start happening, all that might change.