| WIKI | FAQ | Tech FAQ | |
 http://csua.com/feed/ | |
| ||||||
| 7/11 |
| 2001/9/12 [Politics/Foreign/Asia/Others, Politics/Foreign/MiddleEast/Others] UID:36282 Activity:nil |
9/12 Something to think about:
http://www.cato.org/pubs/fpbriefs/fpb-050es.html
Not that this changes the fact that we should nuke everything
from palestine to pakistan and be done with the muslim menace
\_ That's right, if i remember my Bible correctly, didn't
Christ himself give the thumbs up to eye-for-an-eye argument?
\_ You're not remembering it correctly. Try reading it again.
He advocated "turning the other cheek."
\_ irony
Killing all brown people in the world is the best and only
solution. And don't forget to nuke Indonesia and Turkey while
solution. And don't forget to nuke Malaysia and Turkey while
you're at it.
\_ Idiots like gandhi who believed that "an eye for an eye
makes the whole world blind" are the reason we are in
this situation. The fruits of years of diplomacy and
concilliation and consideration were reaped yesterday.
Now is the time for action not moderation and compassion.
\_ HAHAHAHHHHH!!! When have we EVER had a single DAY
of concilliation or consideration in our foreign policy?
Read up on Chile, El Salvador, Iraq, et al. It's sentiment
like this that keeps Kissinger out of the Hague.
\_ Our policy of toleration of egypt, syria, jordan,
iraq, iran, the sudan, wimpiness in korean and
vietnam, detente are all the result of "diplomats".
If we had trusted our military leaders, we would
not be in this situation now.
\_ You're right. We'd be neck deep in blood and no
better off. |
| 7/11 |
|
| www.cato.org/pubs/fpbriefs/fpb-050es.html The Historical Record by Ivan Eland Ivan Eland is director of defense policy studies at the Cato Institute. Executive Summary According to Secretary of State Madeleine Albright, terrorism is the most important threat the United States and the world face as the 21st century begins. High-level US officials have acknowledged that terrorists are now more likely to be able to obtain and use nuclear, chemical, and biological weapons than ever before. Yet most attention has been focused on combating terrorism by deterring and disrupting it beforehand and retaliating against it after the fact. Less attention has been paid to what motivates terrorists to launch attacks. According to the Pentagon's Defense Science Board, a strong correlation exists between US involvement in international situations and an increase in terrorist attacks against the United States. The board, however, has provided no empirical data to support its conclusion. This paper fills that gap by citing many examples of terrorist attacks on the United States in retaliation for US intervention overseas. The numerous incidents cataloged suggest that the United States could reduce the chances of such devastating--and potentially catastrophic--terrorist attacks by adopting a policy of military restraint overseas. |