The problem I see is the bad logic which suggests these "rogues" are not
supported by their nation-state populations. Were all Germans 100% behind
the Nazi regime? No. Was the German populace mainly behind the Nazi regime?
Yes. Could that Nazi regime have come to power to begin with, much less
sustained itself, without this support? No. Were the Allies, therefore,
effectively at war with the German people, the German culture itself? Yes,
we were. Was this "right"? It was inevitable. there was no other way around
the situation. What were we supposed to do, wait around until the German
people came to its collective sense and killed Hitler? Does that strike you
as wisdom?
Today we are faced with similar situations around the world. Here is one.
The ruling fundamentalist Taliban regime in Afghanistan denies any
knowledge of this affair, indeed, it suggests (and I suppose would have us
believe) that our Saudi nemesis Osama bin Laden's al Qaedar organization
could not possibly have been involved in this attack on the two World Trade
Center buildings. Right. Just the same, I suppose, as this crazy man's
organization was not involved in the 1993 bombing of the World Trade
Center, just as this maniac was not involved in the bombing of U.S
embassies in Tanzania and Kenya in 1998, or last October's bombing of
the destroyer Cole.
What to do? For openers, and besides hunting down and executing Osama bin
Laden, we need to get rid of the ruling Taliban regime in Afghanistan,
occupy that country, and remain in occupation until a rational form of
government might be established, until the people who populate this region
of the planet can be educated to pursue more thoughtful ways. How long
would that require? A couple of generations at the least I gauge. Is that
possible? Well, anything ought to be possible. With the will. I don't know
how practical it is, though, given politics and the greed which drives
capitalism. I do know that nothing less will suffice in the long run.
That is how I view the nature of this problem, that is why I suggest a
systemic approach. Killing this man or that will have no good effect at
all. It's like strolling into Iraq to assassinate the mad man there. Sure,
we might do that, or bomb him one fine day, like we tried to do with the
mad man in Libya years ago, but these methods are insufficient even when
"successful."
The best sense I've heard thus far is the proclamation from our president
that America will draw no distinction between terrorists themselves and
those who aid and abet these people. That is the key, for in reality there
is no difference between the one and the other. Until that salient point is
driven home, and until resolution is made all around to take the
appropriate action, then no good solution will be possible.
Tris
Tris, don't misunderstand me in the sincere horror I feel towards this
happening. I loathe everything that has to do with blind terror and
violence. What I wanted to say is just that the civilian people of a
nation very seldom make up the nations problems. There are many around the
world, and many in Europe, who consider USA to be the worst and most
powerful "rogue state" of all, because a lot of the worlds terror and
oppression originate from there. That is not the debate here, it's just an
example; who is really to judge and punish a whole people or religion for
something that a few morons do? Another example: take away Saddam instead
of starving the Iraquis.
Henrik
|