[rescue] God bless America

[Mike Meredith]

On Wednesday 12 September 2001 19:43, you wrote:
> There are, perhaps, two points of view on this to consider.
> First, if the matter is entirely a U.S.A matter, then we should
> handle it unilaterally.  But, if the matter is transcendant

Given that large numbers of non-US citizens have almost certainly died, 
it's already a matter for the world as a whole. And certainly longer 
term measures to combat terrorism should be handled by the world as a 
whole.

> > > And those groups who blamed our foreigh policy for these attacks?
> > > Exterminate them too, and then they can blame their Public
> > > Relations policy for that...
> >
> > Guess I'm a goner, then.  I think that these attacks resulted

Same here.

> You can't attribute it directly to foreign policy.  It goes way

It (especially the modern equivalent of gun-boat diplomacy) certainly 
takes a major contribitory cause for deranged people to carry out these 
acts.

> > To be treated fairly, you must treat others fairly.  Unfair
>
> No.  You treat others ``in kind'' in these sorts of matters, since
> they are not playing by the rules of order, and have no concept of

Who are 'they' ? Most responses to lesser acts of terrorism involve 
blunt military action that may or may not get the funders or organisers 
of terrorism, but almost certainly does kill innocent civilians.

And they are innocent. In the countries we are talking about, the man 
on the street has exceedingly little say over the actions of his 
government; he can't vote them out of office every 5 years.

If you "get" his Uncle Fred who was responsible in some way, the man in 
the street could well say to himself "Well, I don't like it, but I 
guess he had it coming". If Uncle Fred was a harmless old man who at 
worst got a little excited from time to time, and shouted nasty things 
about the US president, then the man on the street (and all Uncle 
Fred's relatives) could well be queuing up at the terrorists recruiting 
offices.

> treat them fairly, they will only terrorize you back.  You must treat
> them with sufficient horror that you get their attention, and scare
> them.  If you fail to do that, they have won.....

As seen time and again, terrorism can never (at least in the cases I 
know of) be defeated by blunt military action. At best, you delay any 
response for a generation (as seen in Ireland) --- do you really want 
your children to deal with further acts in 20-30 years time ?

> The die is cast.  WE MUST respond to them in a manner that they
> understand, will listen to, and be scared of.  The time for talk is
> ended.

As you might have guessed by now, I don't entirely agree with this ... 
at least partially because it could make the problem of terrorism worse.

Something needs to be done about the people who funded and organised 
the attack. I would prefer that they be extradited (under threat of 
force if necessary --- it may not be), tried for crimes against 
humanity, and imprisoned for life (which is a far greater punishment 
that simply executing them).

But there also needs to be action taken to stop further acts of 
terrorism. In addition to greater resources put into intelligence to 
infiltrate terrorist groups, action should be taken against the people 
who fund terrorism (which includes US citizens).