The target for tonight!

[Mensa]

Now that the entire civilized world claims readiness to "fight terrorism", how far do they go?
Do we go after just the ones responsible for Tuesday's dastardly act, or do we do a complete job of it?
There are so many flourishing terror groups today, are all of them to be made targets? Does this include the Tamil Tigers in Sri Lanka, the I.R.A. in Northern Ireland, the Basque Separatists in Spain, the Colombian drug cartels, the American militias? How about the Chechyn rebels?
As they say "one man's terrorist is another man's freedom fighter". Should they all be included because they've all used terror tactics at one time or another?

 

[Mensa]

The problem is they're cross-pollenating. We've had I.R.A. members caught in Peru training Shining Path guerillas. Former members of the Israeli army advising Colombian cartel forces. Tamil Tigers reportedly in Indonesia with Muslim guerillas. Former members of American Special Forces reported in several diverse places. Many members of the I.R.A. were trained by the British, they joined the British army and were trained by them only to take their training and use it to train the I.R.A.

If the Americans only wish to seek retribution against those responsible for New York and Washington, what happens when their erstwhile allies are attacked by a separate group? Is this to be a crusade against "some" terrorists or against "all" terrorists? What about the ones who aided them? This group could prove very large and diverse, are they also to become prey?

Learned opinion is that this war will prove to be protracted and quite possibly costly in human terms, not just military casualties either. Is the world ready for it?

 

[lavender]

 

[Mensa]

Modus-operandi

Is an overt military operation the best way to deal with these people? How about a "Sword of Gideon" scenario? This refers to Israel's response to the murder of her Olympic athletes in Munich in 1972. Prime Minister Golda Meir ordered the Mossad to organize hunter-killer groups to hunt down all those responsible and "eliminate" them. It took several years but all the guilty parties were dealt with.

 

[bigrednz]

The problem is they're cross-pollenating. We've had I.R.A. members caught in Peru training Shining Path guerillas. Former members of the Israeli army advising Colombian cartel forces. Tamil Tigers reportedly in Indonesia with Muslim guerillas. Former members of American Special Forces reported in several diverse places. Many members of the I.R.A. were trained by the British, they joined the British army and were trained by them only to take their training and use it to train the I.R.A.

If the Americans only wish to seek retribution against those responsible for New York and Washington, what happens when their erstwhile allies are attacked by a separate group? Is this to be a crusade against "some" terrorists or against "all" terrorists? What about the ones who aided them? This group could prove very large and diverse, are they also to become prey?

Learned opinion is that this war will prove to be protracted and quite possibly costly in human terms, not just military casualties either. Is the world ready for it?

I too have voiced a similar opinion.

http://www.literotica.com/forum/showthread.php?s=&threadid=46266

 

[Styphon]

Re: Modus-operandi

Hello, Mensa

Is an overt military operation the best way to deal with these people?

I seriously doubt it. In one of its last "outings", America did a foolish thing when it bombed Belgrade. Destroying a TV station with much loss of innocent life, i.e. cleaners, office workers and journalists, just because it was broadcasting stuff they didn't like, was wrong. What those people were doing did not deserve a death sentence from the air, just as the people in the Trade Center didn't.

It was also foolish to arm and supply the Taliban, willy nilly, just because the Taliban was fighting the Russians in Afghanistan. The enemy of your enemy is NOT always your friend.

Don't get me wrong, the Trade Center destruction is a terrible thing, and action must be taken. Negotiations with those responsible, however, are out of the question, because the inference is "destroy a couple of skyscrapers and we'll start to bargain with you."

America and its Allies would be better off backing the local authorities/government (of wherever the culprits lurk) in the arrest and destruction of the group responsible, in accordance with local law. Don't browbeat them, or threaten to put up trade embargoes to force their hand. Work WITH them, and let the world see justice done properly, not vengance hurled at anyone who gets in its path.

Also, lets not forget that while America has never suffered so much loss of life in a terrorist attack before this, neither has the UK! Estimates of British dead, in the Trade Center destruction, number in the several hundreds, and even the IRA (supported in part by American donations, incidentally) have never managed such carnage.

We are America's allies, and always will be I hope, but we too have the right to a choice in the way justice will be served.

Styphon

 

[Mensa]

Food for thought

Hello, Styphon.

Very interesting post. There could be a major snag, however, in that the Taliban of Afghanistan would most likely refuse to co-operate in stopping "freedom fighters" inside it's jurisdiction forcing alternate action.

 

[Styphon]

Re: Food for thought

Hello, Styphon.

Very interesting post. There could be a major snag, however, in that the Taliban of Afghanistan would most likely refuse to co-operate in stopping "freedom fighters" inside it's jurisdiction forcing alternate action.

Although the Taliban have condemned the attack, when push comes to shove, I have little hope they'll do anything BUT refuse to co-operate - but at least America and its Allies would have been SEEN to stick to the principles of justice and fairness by consulting with and working with the authorities. (I'm using "authorities" as we cannot really name names yet)

If the local authorites sanction or condone the culprit's actions by not giving them up, they leave the injured parties little choice of redress, and have also no cause to complain if they face direct retaliation.

However, if America and her Allies have at least TRIED to avoid out-and-out war in such a restrained and public fashion, things will get a lot less messy with the rest of the international community. It may even get us a few more allies.


Styphon

 

[Doulton]

Just a minor point, the Taliban is not a legitimate authority. I heard on some news programme some Afghan saying "We didn't invite Osama bin Laden into our country (He's from Saudi Arabia, if any don't know that) and we didn't elect the Taliban into power." So co-operating with the Taliban for the purposes of appearance would be somewhat hypocritical.

 

[Styphon]

Just a minor point, the Taliban is not a legitimate authority

You'd better tell American Secretary of State Colin Powell that, then! According to the press over here, "...yesterday, he warned Afghanistan's Taliban regime to hand over Osama bin Laden or face the full wrath of the United States."

He seems to credit them with SUFFICIENT authority.

Styphon

 

[registered "^^"]

You can argue about terrorists groups till hell freezes over and words will not stop them. Squirrels consider Boy Scouts terrorists.
The immediate problem is finding a cure for the disease that caused the WTC disaster. Period. Food for thought, more useful information has been gleaned from crash test dummies then has ever been uttered by man. Think about that.