If so, those who prefer UN oversight can look to their recent statements rebuking Karzai's opponents who initially considered a boycott of the election. Otherwise, the mere fact that the taliban were unable to organize widespread attacks to sabotage the elections would be a terrific mark of success, at least at this stage.
----- Original Message -----
From: dana tierney
To: CF-Community
Sent: Tuesday, October 12, 2004 2:04 PM
Subject: Re: Definition of terrorism(WAS The politicization of the Iraq War
do we know this for a fact? Not trying to start a flame here, but...
isn't the consensus that our intelligence in this area really sucks?
Dana
On Tue, 12 Oct 2004 11:02:02 -0500, G <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I agree that the target of the violence is a huge factor in determining
> terrorism.
>
> I don't agree though, that you can make a clean break in the case of Iraq.
> The groups that are attacking the US are the same groups that are killing
> Iraqi civilians, beheading journalists, and blowing up police stations. A
> bomb that kills 10 Iraqi civilians, and 1 US soldier....is considered
> "acceptable loss" by these groups.
>
> On a side note, it's kind of a shame that this Iraq mess seems to be
> overshadowing some amazing developments in Afghanistan.
<snip>
[Todays Threads] [This Message] [Subscription] [Fast Unsubscribe] [User Settings] [Donations and Support]
