OO-VEG From Netherlands, joined Oct 2000, 1148 posts, RR: 1 Posted (13 years 5 months 2 weeks 6 days 5 hours ago) and read 1266 times:
Everybody is talking about a war. A few days ago I posted a thread with the question if a new war would have started and there were quite some people who hoped for a war to pay back the people who did this.
As a concerned European I have to say:
USA always had a key-role in many peace processes. They throw it all away by just starting a new war. It is 100% sure that with such a war a lot of innocent people are going to die. That would mean the USA is going to do the same thing as the terrorists did. Let that not happen please. A bomb would burst in the Middle East involving so many countries who are trying to built up a country with peace instead of war.
Look at Israel and Palestina, one throws a stone, the other one throws it back as revenge, the stone will be returned for the revenge of the revenge and it continues like that. Let's be more diplomatic this time.
Catch the real criminals who did this and not an entire nation.
I hope I am not the only one who would rather see this conflict ending in peace instead of war.
GDB From United Kingdom, joined May 2001, 13320 posts, RR: 77
Reply 4, posted (13 years 5 months 2 weeks 6 days 5 hours ago) and read 1191 times:
While I share your concerns, no way can the US, or it's real allies let this go.
I too thought that Bush would immediatly, and ineffectively, lash out.
He has not, and that's a good sign. Clearly Powell has advised him that the military solution will be long, difficult and sometimes not certain.
But, an effort has to be made, otherwise next time it could be chemical, biological or a crude suitcase nuke. And not just aimed at the US.
I'm not going to defend Isreal, or IMHO the US's wrong-headed policy towards them.
The fact is, these fanatics who carried out this attack, use the situation there as an excuse for their hatred, and exploit it too.
Fundamentalists hate liberal Western democracies, our very exsistance undermines their hopes of installing a Taleban-style theocracy on the world. They twist and distort the teachings of a great faith to achieve their ends. They seek to spark a new holy war between Christains and Muslims. That was the real intention of Tuesdays attacks.
No surprise that NY was the main target. All those various communities, faiths, nations living largely in peace together.
Freedom for both sexes, liberty, free-speech, the focal point of the USA's great melting pot.
New York is all these things writ large, that's why so many foreigners love the place.
All human virtues and vices are there, a microcosm of our age, a glowing symbol of our increasingly interdependant world.
How these fanatics must hate that city, and by extension, the US and the West.
To their bitter, twisted minds, NY is Soddom and Gomorrah. To a fundamentalist who thinks himself an omnipotent entity, the free world is proof of the contary.
So what the terrorists wanted to do on tuesay, what they still want to do, is destroy. Not liberate anyone.
Teahan From Germany, joined Nov 1999, 5310 posts, RR: 60
Reply 6, posted (13 years 5 months 2 weeks 6 days 2 hours ago) and read 1153 times:
I must say that I agree with you. The problem with fighting against such people is that they are willing to die for their beliefs, while most of us are not. This world will not stand a war between Christians and Muslims.
"I do not know with what weapons World War 3 will be fought, but World War 4 will be fought with sticks and stones." -- Albert Einstein
Goodbye SR-LX MD-11 / 6th of March 1991 to the 31st of October 2004
Heavymetal From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 7, posted (13 years 5 months 2 weeks 6 days 2 hours ago) and read 1143 times:
I think those calling for a reasoned response are going to get their wish.
The United States is in a very difficult decision...it's people are calling for epic revenge yet minds at the top are asking themselves if they want to begin a war with the entire Muslim world from Tripoli to Islamabad. The answer is clearly no....so far.
Pakistan is the key, not Afghanistan. Pakistan is a nuclear power, however juvenile in its' abilities. And so far Pakistan's leaders are seeing the clairty of how precarious the future of their part of the world is.
But I would ask those of you who call for restraint from America one thing....you may indeed get it. But in the months and years to come, know that that restraint must have other outlets. So when you hear of the surgical assasination of a suspected terrorist leader...even one who has yet to prove his guilt.... or quick strikes onto sovereign territory to obliterate those who would do this again...hold your tounge. The "rights" and causes which you may think need attention have nullified themselves this past week.
Best case scenario...through diplomacy and common sense , bin Laden and his lietenants are in US custody within a week. US fury ebbs and the nation looks forward to the careful extermination of this man.
Likely scenario.....US search and destroy missions into Afghanistan find and or kill bin Laden. US autorities are given carte blanche in Middle Eastern countries to detain and in some cases arrest hundreds of potential terrorists. bin Laden's organization is pursued relentlessly.
Nightmare scneario.....extremist elements in Pakistan(or which there are considerable numbers) rally against the ruling military council's moderate and cooperative response(assuming that's what we have and not rhetoric) and cause a coup. Suddenly the same mindset that caused 9/11 will have nuclear weaponry.
I'm not even going to speculate what life would be like if that happened.
Redngold From United States of America, joined Mar 2000, 6907 posts, RR: 43
Reply 8, posted (13 years 5 months 2 weeks 6 days 1 hour ago) and read 1137 times:
The thing that concerns me is that bin Laden may be turn out to be the mythical Hydra; you cut him off, and ten new bin Ladens turn up. He is already a living martyr. We need to be very careful about how we approach this, lest it explode in our face with even more ferocity.
Mcdougald From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 9, posted (13 years 5 months 2 weeks 6 days ago) and read 1127 times:
My concerns are similar to Redngold's. The breeding ground for Islamic fundamentalist terrorists is about 4,500 miles across, stretching from Africa's Atlantic coast to the Pakistan-India border, and perhaps even beyond to the Far East. Amid all the talk of a ground war, there's still a pressing need to determine what needs to be done and then how to do the job thoroughly without getting into a hopelessly open-ended conflict against an endless supply of would-be 'martyrs'.
Alpha 1 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 10, posted (13 years 5 months 2 weeks 5 days 23 hours ago) and read 1123 times:
To the author of this thread: you make it sound like the U.S. was the one that killed all those people in New York and Washington. Why don't you damn those who started this conflict, mainly these spinless cowards that are these terrorists. If any threw away the chance at Mideast Peace this week, it was these bastards, not the U.S., not Israel. There was a man in 1938 in Europe who felt like you-his name was Neville Chamberlain, and his thirst to avoid war at all costs helped to plunge the world into the bloodiest conflict it has ever seen. Maybe remember that in all your condemnations of my country.
Toady From United Kingdom, joined Feb 2001, 724 posts, RR: 0
Reply 12, posted (13 years 5 months 2 weeks 5 days 23 hours ago) and read 1115 times:
"There was a man in 1938 in Europe who felt like you-his name was Neville Chamberlain, and his thirst to avoid war at all costs helped to plunge the world into the bloodiest conflict it has ever seen. Maybe remember that in all your condemnations of my country.
Why should he remember that? Chamberlain was British, OO-VEG is Dutch.
Redngold From United States of America, joined Mar 2000, 6907 posts, RR: 43
Reply 13, posted (13 years 5 months 2 weeks 5 days 23 hours ago) and read 1116 times:
Alpha_1, be careful what you say to others in this thread. I am an American too, and I'm not criticizing our nation.
And I beg to differ about "all martyrs are dead." Bin Laden's people worship him as a martyr, and the fact that he is able to secret away so easily makes him larger-than-life to even more people. Death, in that kind of mindset, just makes a person even greater.
Nicolaki From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 14, posted (13 years 5 months 2 weeks 5 days 23 hours ago) and read 1107 times:
The problem with a war, is like Redngold said. There's not only a handful of people who are nuts enough to commit crimes like this, but there is thousands of them.
While America and it's allies will be busy fighting a war in a specific region of the world, those coward kamikaze will blow up themselves all around America, Europe and wherever there will be people against terrorism. Don't forget that not all terrorists live in the Middle East, but some are living all around the world, and those people can mix themselves and dissapear in the population and live like regular citizen until the time they commit their disgustiong act - That is what scares me the most.
OO-VEG From Netherlands, joined Oct 2000, 1148 posts, RR: 1
Reply 15, posted (13 years 5 months 2 weeks 5 days 5 hours ago) and read 1081 times:
Alpha 1: I don't blame the USA for these attacks. Those terrorists deserve to be punished for what they did. But let's face it a war is not what I mean.
What you interpreted as "condemnations of the USA" from my post was wrong. Okay, I am against your death-punishment and also against the gun-control in your country. But I am most certainly not anti-USA. What I meant was that the USA must not start a war as the complete middle-east would be offended and those guys are able to kill the complete USA and the rest of the western civilization if necessary.
TT737FO From United States of America, joined Jun 2001, 472 posts, RR: 8
Reply 16, posted (13 years 5 months 2 weeks 5 days 5 hours ago) and read 1081 times:
>>>"The thing that concerns me is that bin Laden may be turn out to be the mythical Hydra; you cut him off, and ten new bin Ladens turn up. He is already a living martyr. We need to be very careful about how we approach this, lest it explode in our face with even more ferocity.
HERE WE GO AGAIN. The Boogie Man!!! OOOOH!
In 1991 the world was terrified about us going after the Iraqis. Countless times I heard about the valor, skill, and training of the Republican Guard that I would face. Or the cunning and bravery of Saddam's armored force.
When the rubber finally met the road (or sand), we were facing very significant delays after clearing the breach processing all the Iraqi POWS!!! The only regret that I have is not going up through Baghdad, capturing Saddam and flying him home in a C-130 to be Noriega's cell mate. Believe me...we could have done it, but WE SHOWED COMPASSION AS WE ARE A COMPASSIONATE NATION!
And everyone claimed that the Gulf War would be this Jihad and firestorm. While Saddam launched his inept SCUDS at Israel, people sat at the edge of their seats--JIHAD, JIHAD, JIHAD...OH NO. "The mother of all Wars"! The political unity brought about by Bush Sr and the coalition was tremendous. Gee, aren't most of those players still around...Cheney, Powell, Rumsfeld?
Here we are now, 10 years later. Facing another "Boogie Man" in Bin Laden. Facing rugged terrain in Afghanistan. Facing an "unseen enemy". Let 10 more Bin Ladens raise up...each one will be crushed at our heels like a serpent.
It is not the USA who is underestimating the power of Bin Laden...it is the people who underestimate the wrath of the United States and the outcome it will bring.
Heavymetal From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 18, posted (13 years 5 months 2 weeks 5 days ago) and read 1043 times:
TT737, I agree completely that the vaunted Iraqi military machine was overestimated in 91.
The one thing that burdens the present however is the religion factor. Even the most paranoid skeptics in '91 would nod that Iraq was not a hotbed of zealous Islam....Saddam had set himself up as the new Prophet and he really wasn't very good at the job. Most Iraqi regulars were conscripts 'fighting' out of fear for what would happen to them if they didn't. Republican Guard units were the neighborhood bullies who fought simply for the gang top tough that gave them their power.
Now we have a different situation. We've got mixed in with the tactical the toxic notion that God wants these people to fight back. THAT has been and always will be a very ominous fuel. While I believe the number of Muslim radicals in the areas mentioned are signifigantly lower than we think, I still think they could inflict a world of s**t.
As the President said, Americans must have patience to see the results of our vengence. They'll come in the form of select assasinations, bombings and lightning raids, but only after proper intel has been received.
Above all, it is important to remember the "Cheney/Powell/Schwarzkopf" doctrine...at no time should combat be 'fair'. It should be exceedingly unfair, weighted overwhelmingly to our position.
Ln-ojb From Norway, joined Sep 2001, 39 posts, RR: 0
Reply 20, posted (13 years 5 months 2 weeks 4 days 23 hours ago) and read 1038 times:
As long as the US administration so clearly demonstrates the lack of historical knowledge, we can´t just let this warfare get out of control.
President Bush says: "Wanted, dead or alive!", like we were riding around in the old wild West. He has also stated: "this is a new kind of evil".
It´s not! It is a new scale for terrorist activity, and we should all strive to overcome terrorism. But we won´t get that far, unless we are willing to speak and act against the growing gap between the rich and the poor in this world. This is a worldwide problem, and also a problem inside most countries.
Evil is inside every one of us. Warfare is the most dangerous way to let evil get out of control. The US´leaders MUST know which words they are using. When stating that much pressure on targetting just one person, the possibillites to get the number of others vanish in his grave. If you said "Wanted alive!", there would be a chance of communicating that the free world wants to use other standards than terrorism, when it comes to the solving of major conflicts.
"Wanted dead or alive!" is nothing else than to invite all others to use the same methods that the terrorists uses themselves. We can´t support this, and keep on beleiving we are better people than them!
I truly respect the deep sorrow, grief and losses so many Americans must live through these days, and I do understand the anger which comes out of these awful actions. But I don´t think violence will make any solution towards making this world a safer place, at any side of the Atlantic Ocean.
Twotterwrench From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 22, posted (13 years 5 months 2 weeks 4 days 23 hours ago) and read 1034 times:
hey! We didn't start this war. But, by God, we will finish it! The United States of America was deliberately attacked without provocation and the death of her citizens will not be allowed to go unpunished. If you do not stop terrorism at it's roots, it only grows stronger and more bold. And, terrorists don't speak "diplomacy". The only thing they understand is when someone else has a bigger stick than they do. May god have mercy on their souls because the US will not!
Cfalk From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 24, posted (13 years 5 months 2 weeks 4 days 15 hours ago) and read 1008 times:
I absolutely agree. The only way to conduct warefare is to use every means at your disposal.
The U.S. has traditionally proven to be slow to anger. They waited 3 years to enter WWI, 2 years to enter WWII. Both ended up with total commitment. During the Clinton Administration, the U.S. was quick to anger, but the responses were half-hearted, geared towards CNN rather than an effective use of force.
Thankfully, Bush has so far waited before striking, and I hope he keeps his patience until all the facts necessary are in. The U.S. has been suffering from terrorism for some 20+ years, and has (hopefully) reached the slowly building anger necessary to make an effective effort.
Terrorists have always played off their targets' inability to use brutal tactics. They know that traditional hijackings, kidnappings and other acts of violence work because we respond in a consistant way - trying to avoid loss of life.
In the 80's, A KGB agent was kidnapped in Lebanon and held by terrorists who wanted the Soviets to release some of their friends. Instead, The KGB sent them boxes filled with various body parts of about half of those friends, and promised that if the agent was not released, they would be recieving the body parts of the other half. They never bothered the Soviets again, at least until the Soviet Union split up, and became "civilized", where they became fair targets again.
As long as the U.S. is not willing to use every means necessary, they will continue to be a target.
: If you fight a war well, the guy you throw the stone at will not be capable of throwing it back. Arabs and Mafia have long understood it, but "civilis
: I don't want a war but I do beleive we're better off chopping the bastards down now then leaving it for many years so they can gain even more military
: Yes, us Europeans are all pinkos, which is why the UK will almost certainly be involved in any action, particulary special forces. Several hundred Bri
: FLyguy 1 said: Europe does support the USA. As far as I know the European Central Bank offered loans to the USA to overcome the crisis. Also with the
29 Alpha 1
: OO-VEG, boy you just always put the cart before the horse!! "I fully support peace missions of the UN and NATO, but not a WAR. Why would you start a w
: I hope someone didn't say this already, because I didn't have time to read all the posts... I think that the US should take military action against t