eliminating 'rogue states' and 'terrorism'. It's such a clever long-term
aim because how can you ever know when you've achieved it? How will Mr
Bush know when he's wiped out all terrorists? When every single
terrorist is dead? But then a terrorist is only a terrorist once he's
committed an act of terror. What about would-be terrorists? These are
the ones you really want to eliminate, since most of the known
terrorists, being suicide bombers, have already eliminated themselves. "
That was hilarious :)
And it becomes quite silly , and untenable when taken to the extreme.
Which for me implies that it is unethical at the very least.
-Gel
-----Original Message-----
From: dana tierney
hehe. Anyone else see the Monty Python take on the pre-emptive strike
policy?
http://observer.guardian.co.uk/comment/story/0,6903,882459,00.html
Dana
---
Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.614 / Virus Database: 393 - Release Date: 3/5/2004
[Todays Threads] [This Message] [Subscription] [Fast Unsubscribe] [User Settings]
