Doug wrote:
> My answers:
> > #1: Country A supports terrorism against country B. Should country B be
> > allowed to let its military strike back at country A?
> Yes
>
> > #2: If the answer to #1 is "yes", would this always be true, or only for
> > certain countries B?
> Always
But isn't this the heart of the problem? The CIA has been sponsoring terrorism for
decades. They have supplied
training and arms to so many groups in so many places. Even Bin Laden was trained and
supplied by the CIA.
Why is it so hard to take the next step and see why the CIA should cease and desist
their operations of
destabilisation and insurrection around the world.
( I can sort of understand in places like Panama, Haiti, Grenada etc where US security
is involved, but Afghanistan
and the Persian Gulf are a long way away from the US)
Even if the CIA could be convinced to back off, US arms dealers will still have an
active presence in the world's hot
spots. The sad part is that the CIA will probably have a longer leash as a result of
the bombings, when the bombings
are (in part) the result of their activities in the first place.
Russell C.
