----- Original Message -----
From: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "Brin-L" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Friday, September 14, 2001 10:23 AM
Subject: Preparations
> Let me begin with a question. Suppose, as now seems likely, it is
revealed
> that the bombers were supported and funded by the intelligence services of
> a foreign state or states - most likely Iraq. That would mean that the
> _government_ of another country was an active participant in the murder of
> 5000 American citizens. Is there anyone on the list who does _not_ think
> that that constitutes an Act of War against the United States?
I think that the odds on it being an act of war are very high. However, I
think that an act of war cannot be carried out by simply a group of
terrorists, though. I think the actions of a nation are required for it to
really be a war.
>The last time that the United States went to war was 1941. I am _not_
advocating
> the wholesale killing of the citizens of these countries. We are the
> United States. We don't do things like that. But there are other things
> we can do.
I agree fully with all of that.
> The Bush Administration is apparently putting significant pressure on the
> Pakistani government to allow us overflight rights if we choose to strike
> Afghanistan. We have already received permission from (I think)
Tajikistan
> to station special operations forces on the Afghan border. The
> Administration appears to be preparing to launch something of a
coordinated
> strike. The Taliban have refused to hand over Bin Laden without
conclusive
> proof of his involvement. As supplying that would reveal the "sources and
> methods" of American intelligence and make it much easier for other
> terrorists to evade detection and pursuit, that will not, I expect, be
> forthcoming, and it does not appear that the Administration is making much
> in the way of efforts to persuade them any more.
I think this is valid. I think, by reading between the lines, that American
allies are suggesting that the US should demonstrate to them that they have
reasonable evidence before committing military assistance. I hear it not as
a matter of distrust, but as a guard against justifiable anger clouding
judgment. I think we can find ways to let a few individuals from our allies
know enough of sources and methods to confirm our understanding before going
in. We have a chance to do this as a matter of the world vs. terrorists,
and I don't think we should quickly forgo that opportunity. (On the other
hand, I wouldn't dream of revealing sources and methods at all to China in
order to get that country to cooperate.)
The Administration
> appears to be considering an intense bombing campaign designed to cripple
> the Afghan military and weaken the Taliban, combined with special
> operations missions meant to capture and/or destroy as much of Bin Laden's
> organization as possible. I guess, although I have no information to back
> this up, that this would be accompanied by massive aid to organizations
> fighting the Taliban in Afghanistan.
The problem I have with this is that we may be setting up groups that are
going to be as bad as the present one. You can correct me, but didn't the
US have something to do with the original training of some of the folks in
Afghanistan now? That even some of the terrorists may have been trained by
the US for the Afganistan-USSR war?
>
> If it is revealed that Iraq sponsored the terrorist attacks, then we will
> probably turn our attention to the government of Saddam Hussein. In all
> likelihood that would take the form of an aerial attack upon all of the
> assets of the Iraqi government. In essence we would seek to destroy the
> Republican Guard, his weapons of mass destruction, and most of the
> infrastructure of the Iraqi government - buildings, armories, things like
> that. There do not yet, however, seem to be any concrete steps taken
> towards this set of actions. They are contingent, as it were, upon
> persuasive evidence that Iraq was involved in the attacks.
>
Wouldn't we need to do more than this? Wouldn't we need to remove the
governments?
Dan M.
