Subject:
|
Re: Some other perspectives on the tragedy
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.off-topic.debate
|
Date:
|
Thu, 13 Sep 2001 14:23:01 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
594 times
|
| |
|
|
In lugnet.off-topic.debate, Richard Marchetti writes:
> In lugnet.off-topic.debate, Erik Olson writes:
> > Richard, what specifically are the other ideas? You are being vague. What
> > are you expecting to postpone?
>
> Gee, I hate to go all warm and fuzzy on you...
>
> ...but how about we give peace a chance?
We gave peace a chance. Then two commercial airliners hit the twin WTC
buildings. If you are suggesting we forget about it and "give peace a
chance", hoping peace prevails and nothing happens again...thats downright
confusing to me.
We are not currently in a state of peace. If we took on a state of pacifism
and never did anything about it, terrorists would be knocking our doors all
the time simply because they'd know no punishment existed. Make that
knocking our doors down.
I don't think anybody is saying we should go brutalize the entire middle
east. Apparantly what they will do if it turns out to be Bin Laden, they
will demand Afganistan to publicly turn him over to us. On the other hand,
if they refuse and shelter/hide him, there will be military action. I think
I support this idea and it's well within out right.
In my opinion, I think he needs to be taken down even if it turns out
somebody else is responsible. Right now I think we need to commence a real
lock down on terrorism and it looks to me like Bin Laden is the first in
line. I don't think people will tolerate the presence of a known and
accomplished terrorist after an event like this, and he's certainly
committed enough deeds to make a good exuse to locate him.
I hope nobody badly flames me for these opinions. But, you never know.
--Josh
|
|
Message is in Reply To:
66 Messages in This Thread:
  
 
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
