At 10:23 PM 9/11/2001 -0400, you wrote:
>Bottom line is -- we're not safe until the terrorists are dead. They're
>basically homocidal maniacs (often religious homocidal maniacs) on a much
>larger scale. And as long as they're free, they'll keep on killing.
But does that in itself justify killing a bunch of people?
Some things are more important than our immediate safety. It is in our
immediate interest to kill all terrorists, but that will only prove the
ideals of the terrorists to future terrorists. It is safer for us to kill
all the terrorists until there are too many to kill. In is in our long term
interests to locate the individuals responsible, giving them a trial in an
unbiased jurisdiction, and eliminating them individually. Otherwise we
perpetuate the reason for this action.
There is no easy solution, but proving the beliefs of the terrorists will
only make the overall picture worse. If we stoop to their level we lose. If
we handle this in a good way, we prove the terrorists wrong and that will
do more to eliminating behavior like this than killing al of the terrorists.
We need to understand the information war and use that to our advantage.
Now available in a San Francisco Bay Area near you!
http://www.blivit.org/mr_urc/index.cfm
http://www.blivit.org/mr_urc/resume.cfm
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Structure your ColdFusion code with Fusebox. Get the official book at
http://www.fusionauthority.com/bkinfo.cfm
Archives: http://www.mail-archive.com/[email protected]/
Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/index.cfm?sidebar=lists
