fred wrote:
> Here's one: Marshall Plan First ... serious humanitarian aid -- food, > medical, infrastructure -- not just in Afghanistan (after we used them to > fight our proxy war with the USSR, we left their country and people in a > shambles when it was over) but in all Arab and Muslim countries where needed, > buying good will throughout the world (our current aid is roughly 10 cents > for every $100 of GNP as opposed to other major industrialized nations who > give roughly 20-30 cents for every $100 of GNP) which will build a much > stronger coalition against terrorism than just political intimidation. This > will alleviate some of the desperate conditions that breed terrorism, as > opposed to ineffectual broadband military action that can't help but to > enrage currently moderate Muslims and will only foment more terrorism. > Concurrently with large scale humanitarian aid, use special forces in highly > focused covert action to track down Al Qaeda cells around the world. For something like the Marshall plan to work there would have to be a willingness of the participants to be helped and that is not present. Those people do not want our help. They want us out, period. Also, the simplistic statement give peace a chance makes a great song but it is not realistic in this setting, as Mary said. Those countries and the governments, people, etc. in them would have to have the same kind of mindset that we do for that to work. They don't. Infrastructure. To help them build an infrastructure would require us to be even more involved in the region than we are. They would never allow it. Medical assistance. The same thing. They would never allow it. As for our proxy war with the USSR, I suppose the alternative would have been better which would have been to give no aid at all and allow the Soviets to completely overrun the country. I watched a documentary on this country last week. It has always been in a great state of turmoil, to say that we are responsible for leaving their country and their people in a state of turmoil is simply not accurate, or true. We were not responsible for going into Afghanistan after that conflict and doing anything. The moral thing to do. Maybe, but it was not our job to do so. What did we do? Hmmm. We helped them kick the Soviets out of their country which is what they wanted in the first place. I would say that their own mismanagement of their country and the Soviets left their country in a shambles, the U.S. most certainly did not do it. As far as the GNP, there are countries in the Arab world that are filthy rich and we are supposed to be the ones who give all of the aid, infrastructure, medical, etc. Hogwash. We are not responsible for the "desperate" conditions in the Middle East. They are. The terrorists have made it very clear and concise that we are in a region that they don't believe we have any right to be in. That is one of the reasons for their hate. They do not want us in Saudi Arabia, or anywhere else. Even though the Saudi government has welcomed us. They state very clearly that they have gone to Afghanistan to take it over and make it the base for their terrorist actions. Where is the outrage for all of those native Afghanis who are were being starved and brutalized before this action was even started? The starvation, children dying because of no medical care, refugee problem : did not begin with our involvement. Hmm. Marshall plan.. Syria. Nope. Iraq. Nope. Iran. Nope. Palestinians. Nope. Lebanon. Nope. And why? They want Israel out. Not likely to happen. Pressure Israel and Palestine for a real peace accord. Pressure them with what? What could we possibly do to overcome such hatred, that has been going on since the beginning of time. As long as Israel is there, the hate will continue. I suppose we could completely disavow Israel and tell them they are on their own. That might do the trick but don't think it is going to happen. Highly focused covert action? Isn't that what we are doing now? Isn't there a chance of civilian casualties in a highly focused covert action? Or would a few civilian casualties be more acceptable than a larger number? We could ask them to turn themselves in peacefully and explain that we were going to help them with their infrastructure, medical care, etc. I would imagine that they would respond in kind and we could be great friends. Ain't gonna happen. So what will be do? We need to catch them and bring them to justice or if for no other reason than just to make sure they don't kill anymore innocent people. How will we achieve that and make sure, completely and with no chance of failure, that no one is hurt, that no one is negatively affected? The concept of peace put to them with an olive branch extended, a John Lennon tune playing in the background, a barbeque, our hands extended, the Marshall Plan? I only wish it were that simple. Mack
