> "
>
> The USA is not bombing civilians in Afganistan, n
Not yet, Jim, not yet, but according to our government, war is coming. I have
asked: are you ready to do this?
> or crashing planes full of
> civilians into high rises. For goodness sake, here, Vince. Have you lost
> it? Are you seriously equating bin Lauden's guilt for terrorism, with our
> supposed guilt for *conducting military espionage on terrorists*?
That is not a phrase that I ever use - "military espionage" is not a phrase or
concept in the questions that I posed.
> You can
> hold 'em up together but they have nothing in common. Nothing. C'mon.
> Killing school kids is "like" spying on terrorists? Mend your speech a
> little, lest you mar your fortunes.
Again, I never spoke of spying on terrorists. Totally unsure of how this is a
response to what I have written. It is easily possible that with the deluge of
posts that some things have gotten mixed up,
Jim, again, listen to all of the news. The build up to support war by
demonizing the Taliban, and Bush's own speech before Congress, make clear that
the Taliban will be the object of our attack. Read the posts in the JMDL
which speak of war against the Taliban.
You have pulled of my statements out of context and not answered them in the
fullness of the questions. However, I give you much thanks for your answering
in that so many people have not even tried to think these things through, and I
thank you..
>
>
> Vince, no one is talking about taking military action against the Taliban
> because we trying to do a hostile takeover, promoting democracy. Read what
> you wrote. This is not about declaring war on a government. It's about
> declaring war on terrorists.
Wrong Jim, The state department just today has been pondering who they will
find to replace the Taliban. Might I suggest NPR as a good place to get news.
> Are you implying that if we DON"T dismantle
> the terrorists, that they will go away? You imply that if we inflame the
> terrorists, that we become the terrorists. That if we try to stop
> terrorism, we are responsible for the death of innocents.
>
> This is clearly absurd. You surely assume that the us military knows at
> least a little about the Taliban already. If we have gathered intellegence
> on the Taliban, then by your accusation, the US military brought on the
> attacks. That's absurd.
That is absurd and I have never said that the military brought on the attacks,.
> Maybe you're thinking "turn the other cheek" but
> IMO, this is more like me giving up whole classrooms of school children
> because of someone else's hangnail. There's a difference in degree that you
> aren't getting at all.
I will ignore the slam, Jim, as I very clearly get the difference. The
question: do many others? This is not a school yard spat. The death toll
proposed will make the death count of September 11 seem small.
I think I very clearly suggested alternatives: world tribunal.
Thanks for the reply Jim, and may God bless everyone in these days.
(the Rev) Vince
