I’m listening to the news about the terrorist attack on London today (7/21/05). Specifically, right now I’m listening to the news conference that Prime Minister Blair is giving on the attacks. He has repeatedly mention that the best thing people can do is just go on with their lives. He is suggesting that ignoring the attacks and going on with your business as you normally would will be the best way to defeat the terrorists.
IS HE CRAZY? IS PRESIDENT BUSH CRAZY?
The best way to defeat the terrorists is to pack up all the US troops, tanks, fighter planes, and helicopters that are sitting in Iraq and move them right into Iran. That is ONE place that we (CIA, FBI, military, and all Americans) know has an over-abundance of terrorists. The terrorists there are free to plan and stage attack after attack. Take the fight to the terrorists. Fight them on their land, not on the land of the UK or US.
How does sitting on your hands, ignoring the innocent people that are being killed, win a war?
These problems have been a long time coming.
We helped a certain Afgan army fight off a Russian army and then dropped them like a cheap suit. Two days after Sadam gases millions of his people, Rummy met with Sadam to discuss(rumors) oil reserves and such. And the list goes on and on. American business men, along with British and such are constantly, how would we say this nicely, influencing smaller “places” for their benefit. They are the REAL problem.
Now before you say I am supporting any type of violence, please be aware that I don’t support them in any way. There are plenty of ways to “get back at” the manipulators, killing innocent people is not one of them. To put it bluntly, I wish the US would be more of an isolationist nation. And if and when someone did attack us, nuke the hell out of them. I.e. Speak softly and carry a big stick.
Sorry but if anyone attacked the US and we leveled a 4mi area, no one would ever touch us again. The fight on Terrorism would be over and not a single US soldier would have to die.
But that will never happen because the politician would never allow it.
Wow! Those are some “hot sports opinions”, Mark!
I have to disagree on the Isolationist Policy. I think we need to be out there with a strong presence or else terrorism will continue to grow.
I agree on bombing somebody! And we have been attacked! Over and over and over! What we’re doing in Iraq IS NOT ENOUGH! I’m have no doubt that our intelligence and military people have a long list of targets in other countries. It’s time to start attacking those targets! Hit them hard. Leave no survivors. Of course the intelligence has to be correct.
Erik
Good point on the “Blair” remarks. Too many liberals would rather sit around and pretend like another attack won’t happen if we leave the terrorists alone. As simplistic as it might sound, “freedom isn’t free”. It is worth fighting for and defending. If you chose not to do either, then it is taken from you. History has never shown otherwise.
In fact, because we have this freedom, liberals can make their pansy comments. However, if their way was to actually come about, they would be left with only freedom of thought and not speech.
I disagree with Mark’s comments regarding the issue of US intervention. He would be paying $10 per gallon for gas if the US and others weren’t “influencing smaller “places” for their benefit”. The reality is that globalization on economic and political levels are making the world a very small place. Everything is becoming tied together and issues on other continents now affect the rest of the world. This change has largely come about through new technology. Isolationist policies don’t work anymore. Even China has had to go global. North Korea is dying, in spite of itself, trying to maintain a now obsolete policy of Isolationism. There is an excellent book that address’ this issue called ‘The Lexus and the Olive Tree: Understanding Globalization’ by Thomas Friedman.
By the way, not a bad site for an Aggie.
rb