Worm wrote:
>This is a rather large issue - there is no group of
>peoples or countries that has claimed responsability
>for the attacks - so this could yet go in any
>directions.
Exactly, the US (yes I know you are canadian) is often fast at blaiming
muslims without reason.
>The attacks are the style of the palestinian nations -
>and they currently have a motive. There are a *lot*
>of issues;
First of there's no palestinian nation, or atleast to my knowledge Arafat
hasn't declared the areas (the Westbank and Gaza) in Israel as a sovereign
state (they still belong to Egypt and Yordania).
The attacks are NOT in any way in any sort of used style. These attacks are
completly new since it was much more complex than your average terrorist
attack. You started out by pointing out that it can go in any direction,
why do you then pinpoint it to some people?
>a) There are a lot of loyal palestinians (and allies)
>living in the U.S. and Canada...if we declared war on
>their countries we'd see a lot of hell here.
And if the US declared war because persons living inside (or comming from)
a country does something wrong the rest of the world will look on in horror
as the US has become the first democratic country to start a war. Well, the
US has already done so, but this would be much more obvious.
>b) If a war is declared, you can bet that a nuclear
>bomb will be dropped - the terrorists are clearly
>extremists - I'm guessing the only reason israel
>didn't see nukes is because it's so close to
>themselves.
Ahem, technically a bomb set up by a palestinian against Israel isn't
terrorism. One against the US would of course be one. Once more, from the
definition a native american that would do it wouldn't be a terrorist
either since he/she also fights for his lands liberation. Please note that
I'm just pointing out that what is and isn't an act of terrorism, the
slaughter of (inocent) people is not something I can respect. I only hope
that the US, this time, don't bomb completly innocent people as they did
after the two bombs in Africa 1998. Or perhaps US inteligence is so bad
that they can't understand the diffrence between a biological/chemical
weapon plant and a medical one?
>c) Currently there's no one to declare war on - they
>have no way they can say it's any one country with
>them denying it...and the U.S. is far too democratic
>to simply start attacking a country... - this means
>that they'll have to choose an alternative. It's
>possible that they'll have another country do their
>dirty work. They might give israel pretty much
>unlimited funding to eliminate the arab nations.
Eliminate? Please, people that must fight to survive will do so very well
(look at Israel, or why not in Bosnia-Hercegovina). And, any attack on the
arab countries would drain the oil from the western world. Personally I
think that the arab league should have tried that as a way to get Israel to
start to listen to reason. The idea of throwing everyone in Israel into the
sea (as some fundamentalists think) isn't very smart, but atleast stopping
an escalation of the conflict is a start. Besides, threathening the western
world that they should take the same action against Israel as they have
against other countries would also be wise.
Besides, Israel has never activly started a war AFAIK, they have however
provoced them - and there's no easy sollution to that conflict, but war
isn't one of them.
"War does not make one great" - Yoda in the Empire Strikes Back
And the Vietnam war was started by the US claiming that a US navy vesel had
been sunk, a vesel that never existed so it isn't as democratic as you may
think/hope.
>This is a pretty strange predicament. There already
>is a war being fought but there's no one to fight
>against - it's just turning into built up hate and
>want for revenge.
Which IMHO doesn't lead to anything, what needs to be done - except making
some symbolic gestures to make the public feel more safe - is to solve the
underlying problem. Why are these people ready to do something like this?
Of course there will always be some idiots that will do whatever they feel
(as has been pointed out in the gun discussion we tend to have here at
times), but not something as complex as this. Only a large organization, or
a country, is likely to be able to get something like that rolling. And of
course, you need to have people that have nothing left to loose to take
control of the planes. As long as people see no point in living on and has
a hate for others things like this will happen, no matter what meassures
are used to increase safety.
BTW: Thinking this was bad? Picture that they had set out to hit nuclear
plants instead. Only one good hit on one would be much more devastating.
//Bernie
