Violence Never Solves Anything ........

[Sled Puller]

Our laws are set up like that right now- If you are with a murderer, or drive him to the scene of the crime, you are also responsible.



If a kid breaks a window, you don't give him a candy bar and send him to the movies, do you?



Gene

 

[Champane Flight]

Nope

No Gene,we haven't fed the middle east,we have sent food to countrys in Africa the far east and so on. The truth is there are about 500,000 Afgan refugees massed at the border of Pakistan right now. They are starving . These people have been cut off from the rest of the world for a long time. The Afgan people have been at war for the last 20 years. The taliban goverment is not recognised by any other goverment but Pakistan right now.

This is probably Clintons fault to. Bushs approval rating is soaring right now. I have not seen much to warrant it. But I follow him. Blameing someone is not going to right a situation.



I really don't see us going in to these countrys and removing the terorist factions without any inside help. Afganastan is a very inhospitable country,mountains,hot,cold,and desert. The people we are going to battle are tough,whether we want to admit it or not. Maybe the toughest we have ever faced. As one Russian soldier said"They know how to die. They will look at right in the eye and smile as you kill them". The one thing we have going for us is that they have treated there people like ****. If we are smart we can use this. We have used propaganda campaigns before. We need a good one now.



Everybody wants some paybacks right now. But to strike out without thought is crazy. I don't think we have a grip on what and who we are going to fight. Bin Laden?The people who support him?He!! everybody supports him. If we get Bin Laden,there are hundreds of thousands that will take his place. We are doing pretty good right now at putting them on the run. If they are on the run all the time they will not have any time to set up another attack. We need to get Bill Moher to set up an interveiw with Bin Laden and bomb the he11 out of both of them when he shows up.



I don't hink we will see much in the way of military strikes. I do believe that this will be much like our ineffective drug war. A strike here and there and a blurp on the news saying that 25 terorist were caught today. Remind you of anything?How about the body counting of Nam. Of course there will our own bodys to count also. This brings up to many crappy memories.

 

[Max340]

Bill does hit the nail on the head.



But the fact is, these people DO have the ability to reason. To think they cannot is a mistake.



But again, simply using violence is not making the price high enough. Saddam still holds power, and we regularly smack him with violence. We haven't stopped his economy, nor have we stopped feeding his people. Same goes for Quaddahfi.



CF, again, I agree with you.

 

[Sled Puller]

CF,

Points well taken. I don't have a problem with feeding hungry people, even though I cringe at welfare!



I have seen a lot of good suggestions on these boards that may work. If you take a little of all of them.



I don't believe Bush has "yes" men/women in his cabinet, and I don't believe they will do anything stupid like Nam politics, or leaving Saddam in power.



Drug war,









I think Bush's people will get the job done.



Gene

 

[NVR FNSH]

Originally posted by Bill Lins

. If we make an proper example of Afghanistan, then other governments sympathetic to the terrorists will not risk allowing them into their countries. If they cannot secure a base of operation, they cannot effectively operate.

Bill,

I hope you really meant making a proper example of the Taliban NOT Afghanistan.



Brian

 

[NVR FNSH]

Originally posted by Mark Kitchell

Max and Others of that ilk: If you don't think freedom is worth defending; why are you here? It's morally and intellectually bankrupt to cite your reliance on 'freedom of speech' and the right say whatever you want when you are unwilling to defend that right. The same reasoning says people who don't care enough to vote don't have a right to gripe about whoever's in office.



Now; I know you'll launch into a lengthy tirade about your rights as an American... see paragraph one. You don't deserve those rights since you're unwilling to earn them. Thanks to people like Chad, nps, and myself you got 'em anyways. And that gives us the right to recognize liberal pacifists as boils on the butt of a free society. Your Welcome.





Semper Fi

Mark,

I have not served in the military but I have/do work in industries that support the military. Does your military service as a potato peeler ( I have no idea what Mark did in the military - I'm making a point) make you any more worthy than my work as a mechanical designer on projects such as F-22 or V-22? I don't think so. Does my lack of military service mean I don't have the same rights as you? Wrong pal. End of story. My rights as an American citizen were given to me by the Constitution and Bill of Rights and the fact that I was born here (or naturalized). Not you, not Chad, not nps. Last time I checked I did not have to EARN those rights. They are inalienable. Do I thank you for defending those rights? Absolutely. Now get off your f'ing high horse.



Am I willing to use deadly force to defend OUR rights/liberities as Americans? Try to stop me if the need arises.



Mark - you need to learn to read pal. No where did Max340 state that he is a against the use of violence/deadly force. He simply stated that violence will not correct the root cause of the problem. (I'm sorry, I'm using terms that I learned while shirking my duty to EARN my rights)



Brian

 

[Bill Lins]

Originally posted by NVR FNSH





Bill,

I hope you really meant making a proper example of the Taliban NOT Afghanistan.



Brian

No sir, I MEANT Afghanistan. Sounds as though you may be one of those who is wringing their hands over "collateral damage". You had better understand that, except for the uniformed personnel @ the Pentagon, EVERY victim of 9/11 was "collateral damage"!



As far as I am concerned, all the lives in that country are not worth ONE of those lost here and I do not apologize for this, especially after seeing the enemy dancing and celebrating. You need to understand that we are at WAR and everyone in Afghanistan IS the enemy.



I wonder how you feel about our using the atomic bomb twice on Japan @ the end of WW2. Remember, they attacked a MILITARY target @ Pearl Harbor. The civilian casualties were truly incidental except for the acts of a few rogue pilots. It was a far cry from the attack on the WTC. If, as I believe, we were justified in using nuclear devices in 1945, we are manifold justified in using them now. The people who attacked us this time are the kind, like Khaddafi and Hussein, who understand only violence. By making "a proper example" of them, I mean a use of force so massive and terrible, with the certainity of more to come, that those who sympathize with terrorists will not dare to assist them. Only when the rest of Earth's nations understand that we simply will not allow nations that support terrorism to remain in existence will terrorism cease to exist.

 

[Max340]

Bill, while I agree with your assessment of the collateral damage and its definition, I do not agree that we need to kill all Afganistanis.



The idea here is, if we ARE the better society, and we ARE the more civilized, we need to realize that not all Afgans are the bad guys.



For example, would it be right to inflict upon our entire nation the retribution due our extremist religious figures? Do we follow Jerry Falwell? Conversely, do you believe all Afgans follow the Taliban?



Its not a matter of collateral damage. Its a matter of not killing on purpose any more than the enemy itself. I strongly believe there will be collateral damage, and that this damage is... HAS to be accepted. I think that anyone named bin Laden that can be proven to have an association with Osama should count their days. Anyone who has money from him should suffer as well.



But to kill a citizen of a foreign country for doing nothing more than those who were killed in the U. S. were doing - earning a living to take care of their families and pursue happiness - is not only wrong, it serves no logical purpose. Worse, it could deepen the attitude, the hatred, of this country.



Killing people certainly instills fear. But when that fear manifests itself in an attack on the aggressor, it makes little sense to kill more than is necessary.

 

[Bill Lins]

Originally posted by Max340



For example, would it be right to inflict upon our entire nation the retribution due our extremist religious figures? Do we follow Jerry Falwell?



I think that anyone named bin Laden that can be proven to have an association with Osama should count their days.



But to kill a citizen of a foreign country... serves no logical purpose.

Max, you either have missed the point of my posts or are being deliberately obtuse. We, as a country, do NOT allow Jerry Falwell, et al, to physically attack and kill foreign citizens in their own countries in the name of God or our nation. Your use of this as a comparison is ludicrous.



To capture or kill bin Laden and his followers, while a fitting revenge, will NOT accomplish the goal most important to us, i. e. prevention of other attacks. If we were to capture or kill bin Laden and his group, others WOULD be inflamed to attack us in retribution. The cure, the "logical purpose" as you put it, is to remove the states that support and sponsor terrorism, beginning with Afghanistan. It doesn't matter how mad terrorists are at us, as long as they cannot garner support because the states they must depend upon are so afraid of the certain retribution we would visit upon them that they will not dare support terrorism.

 

[Champane Flight]

We had better.

Well,if we follow the ideas of you guys we might as well wipe out the whole middle east and make it a parking lot. We had better use the nukes and get it over with. And we will still have Bin Laden and his merry band,only a little bigger with the backing of Russia, China,and a few others. Osama will be so happy.



To put things in perspective. Do you think Jerry Falwells followers would believe you if you told them he was an evil man. Probably not. However every time he puts his foot in his mouth,he is one step closer to losing them. Bin Laden and his merry band would love to have the USA bomb the he11 out of Afganastan,it will just spread his doctrine of hating the USA a little more. All the high tech weapons and elite fighting forces in the world cannot wipe out an IDEA. When we capture Bin Laden there will be another one to take his place. And if we bomb them there will be hundreds of thousands to take his place.



The idea of the Taliban and some of the radical factions are in Pakistan. Do we bomb them also?After the goverment has offered us help?There are radical factions in England,do we bomb England?



As far as daring to attack the USA. It has been done. They have NO respect for this nation. And they really could care less if they all die in the process of this so called war. Destroy Afganastan,already done. They have about 12 airplanes and a few old soviet tanks. They do have a lot of followers over 300,000 at last count. They would love to die for the cause. And if we take them out of power,they will go to the hills and fight a guerilla war again. We all know where that will lead. Russia has already fought that one.



As far as them not daring to attack us,this is the kind of thinking that has got us into this mess. The thinking we are invincable,and the chest pounding only pi$$es people off. We need to start acting like the great country we are and use our brains instead of our might for once. This is not WW2,although if we blow it,it may be WW3.

 

[BK]

I cant believe how muddled this thread has gotten , very much to the point that even those that have been in it for soo long don't get the meaning of what other people of written.

The thread should be closed, deleted.



If I were to generalize my feelings of some of those I've "written against" It would seem Champane Flight and Max340 want to go hug them to death. according to them Covert missions and a war wont work, again generalizing and writting down MY take on the feeling I get from reading their posts... . but I'm sure thats not what they really want todo..... and there's nothing much else left since we've proven they don't want our aid. Funny as you go to hug them I'm sure the last thing you would feel is the bomb against your chest... ... and the last thing you will hear is click..... but it'll be like a shell game. . not knowing under which robe the bomb will be under... ...



Nor is Champane Flight generalization accurate with what I think should be done and I can see that even my words get muddled since I havent done a very good job of drawing my lines and describing them.





I think what got us to this point was NOT giving these terrorists what they deserve back in a way they understand. Trying to act throught the UN, sending over millions of our tax dollars for the Afgany's hunger and poor havent done SQUAT. In fact I bet the hundreds of millions we sent never got to those it was intended for. . but bought more weapons and flight lessons for their fight against us. Take off the blinders and look at our history of dealing with these terrorists. . we've done a @#$@ job in the past. Our President is the 1st one in 15 years to wake up and say, this isn't right our past policies have proven themselves not to work... time to take a look at what does work to PREVENT and PROTECT AMERICANS from this.



I still believe that armchair terrorists (I don't see him strapping on a bomb and walking into a building) Bin Laden should be shot and killed, real slowly... let him become a martyr... it will only help reduce the gray areas and help divide the people in the ME into his real followers and not... . giving us a clear idea of who are threats are and make GW's job easier. In that past, that was Russia's Vietnam... once we have a clear battle to fight and if treated soo, I'm sure we can do whats needed. The technology has dramaticly changed since Vietnam and even the Gulf War. We were just learning how to use some of the newest toys that had never been used in war before while in the Gulf.

 

[John Berger]

Violence doesn't solve anything...

however, when it is met and resisted with equal force and violence, it prevents the permanent perpetuation of anarchy and fear. This is where dictators and tyrants go to rot for all eternity. Like it or not, our world is ruled by the violent use of force. I'm glad we're the biggest guys on the block. We don't conquer with violence, rather we meet it with equal and direct force and we liberate those who have been enslaved by tyranny. After we destroy you, we help you up on your feet and the lesson you had better have learned is not to do such things again. Many of you may disagree with this and at the same time be tempted to launch into an academic discussion of the do's and dont's of this topic. I prefer to deal with reality. Reality says that the people who did this must be dealt with swiftly, severely and violently, in a manner of our President's choosing. To paraphrase John Wayne from the movie True Grit: "I'll see that you get a fair trial and a fine hangin". Nuff of this soap box pablum. Let's go kick some a$$. Violently, too!!!

 

[Max340]

Bill, the comparison is not ludicrous. People are claiming we should kill all residents of a country. But do all those residents follow the religious leaders or simply the leaders that attacked us?



The same follows here, do we as a nation follow Falwell or Robertson? Or is it only some of us that are radically religious?



IOW, do you feel that we as a nation should be eliminated on the actions of a few, or should we rid ourselves of the radical faction that has gone too far? What you are suggesting is that a nation should be eliminated for the actions of a few.



As far as state support, it IS possible to have live Afganistani people that do not support terrorism. It is also possible to have countries that do not support terrorism that are of the same religion as the terrorists.



BK, If you read what I say, its far from hugging them to death. I have, and will continue to do so, endorsed violence as a needed and used tool in the inventory. I think it would be highly effective if we killed the terrorists and helped the commoners who are being oppressed by thoes that support terrorism. I also expressly said that covert missions were likely the way this war would begin, and I applaud that tactic.



Where is it proven they do not want our aid? There are thousands looking for food at the borders, do you really think they care where it comes from?



I agree that in the past we have done far too little to curb terrorism. I was very pleased to hear Bush say that all terrorists AND the regimes that harbor them will be dealt with as the enemy.

 

[BK]

Max340 this is what you wrote:

"BK, I agree, but how does a set of covert assasignations fit in with what we know as our founding set of values? I'm not sure, but I agree, it is effective. However, does it solve the problem? No. "



It didnt sound as if you were applauding the tatic...



hence if you read the rest of my post... this thread is getting way to muddelled...

 

[Champane Flight]

Hugging them to death?

Come-on,give me a break. I in no way endorse hugging them to death. I do however preach thinking before acting. We all want some comeupins in this whole affair.



We might be the big kid on the block,but the last war we really won was WW2. That was over 50 years ago!This type of rationality(Chest thumpin and saber ratteling)is what makes people believe some of these radical doctrines!!!!!



I believe that our goverment has already begun the actions needed to route out the terorists. However folks,if you are looking for a carpet bombing of Afganastan,I don't think you will see it soon. And if you do it will be a mistake.

 

[Chad Sheets]

Oh, heck with it guys. Lets just drop it. I am sure nothing like this will happen again for another 50 years or so. In the mean time we can try to make everyone love us to the best of our ability. That should take almost the 50 years to do. By that time, some other country will be mad at us because we quit sending them rice or money, so now they want to blow us up.



Its a never ending cycle, but with time, love, understanding a few slaps in the face now and again, we will be the victors through simply trying to do the right thing. I know deep down inside that's what the people of this loving nation want, especially the victims and family members from September 11th's "awakening" (attack sounds so negative... after all it was a wake up call to help those poor people understand why we are the great helpers of the World... I know it would mean so much to them).



I wonder why people in the military have to take an oath to defend and protect the nation no matter what? Seems kind of silly to me. The guy at the gas station who pumped my gas has done just as much to protect and defend the USA as any Medal of Honor winner has. Is it the actions of a person that makes them high and mighty, or is it their affiliation to a group? I know a bunch of engineers at work who would be tickled to know they are entitled to burial in Arlington National Cemetery due to a disability or high ranking award/medal, a VA home loan, payments from the government for a service connected disability, help purchasing prosthetics and the honor of joining a number of organizations across the Nation that only take prior military people. I say throw all those "rules" away. There is no reason for them to exist. Yes sir, I see no reason why there should be any difference between people who peel potatoes under the UCMJ and are vulnerable to being called out on the front lines to fight at any given notice, or the people designing planes trains and automobiles under the direct safety of the potato peeler off in some strange country not knowing if this will be his last peeled potato or not.



God bless. I am going out to the garage to cut up any guns I have, then I am going to the bank and withdrawing some money for humanitarian aid in some country that thinks birth control is something a female does during all 10 pregnancies. I am sorry for what we have not done to help. I am laying on my back now, with my feet in the air legs spread waiting on the next poor country I can help

 

[Chad Sheets]

 

[Sled Puller]

Chad,

Try not to ridicule the people who supply you on the front lines too much.

Someday, in a crappy little country, you may need ammo for that M-16. Or maybe even a potatoe to peel, hope that farmer had a good crop.

And I bet the Marine next to you is not going to have time to load some shells or plant a garden, as he is busy watching your back!



We are all loyal to the same thing here, Freedom. Some just think there are different ways to go about defending it.



The really funny thing is we still don't know WHAT Bush is doing about it!



Gene

 

[Chad Sheets]

I dint mean to ridicule. I was just echoing the same thoughts as earlier, and that is : no ones commitment to joining up with the Armed Forces is any different than going to work for any business. I thought that thought process was what we were all agreeing to?



Parachuting down on Grenada and being shot at in mid air and dying before you hit the ground like those Soldiers did in 83 is really no different than a guy who runs a sky diving company.



The Sailors who died and were injured during the USS Cole attack were no different than the people who drown or become injured every year in other boating accidents.



The Air Force pilot (Scott O'Grady I believe was his name) who was shot down and lived off bugs and rescued by Marines is no different than a farmer who puts his crop duster down in a cornfield and is rescued by the fire department.



The Marines who were killed rescuing the school students in Grenada were no different than the school teacher who rushes his students out of the class during a fire drill.



Everyone's job is very important. I dont think you can say one is more meaningful or important than another, however the risk factor involved can be weighed.



You can be a cleaner and slip in the shower and die, with odds like 1 billion to 1. Or you can be an Amtrak crew member who's average life expectancy in combat is less than 30 seconds. Both jobs are important, but the risk factors are very different, at least that's what some say. Its all the same to me anymore. We should get a Purple Heart for injuries caused on the jobsite too. Its all the same.

 

[Champane Flight]

Face it.

The life expectency of my MOS in Nam was three days. I made it two years. My only injury was almost cutting my thumb off with a lid from a can of bean dip sent from home. That does not mean I wasn't hurt from my duty. I have permanent mental visions of death and horrors not seen by your average civilian. I have been able to control these by shear grit. I am a productive part of this society and have been since my discharge.



I hid in a bottle for many years and 16 years ago I got help and haven't returned to it. I did not get the welcome home I expected. The glory is hard to find in war. I am and always will be for a peaceful solution. Sorry if this offends anyone. However I was raised to fight for my country right or wrong and will if called again.



I do feel anguish over the attacks on America. It seems our country has taken one he11 of a hit. It seems we have been very lucky not to have been hit before this. This is an attack on every Americans pride. We are an arrogant bunch. We have reason to be. We have a successful society. But,a warrior without a war is not needed.



We have an important duty to perform as civilians. However If anyone believes that it is more important than our men and women in the military,you had better think again. When you are or were at the party in college,there are men and women in the mud and the blood folks. And all the importance of your education and freedoms depend on that person in the line of fire.