Subject:
|
Re: Some other perspectives on the tragedy
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.off-topic.debate
|
Date:
|
Thu, 13 Sep 2001 19:10:58 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
487 times
|
| |
|
|
In lugnet.off-topic.debate, Richard Marchetti writes:
> Erik writes:
> > Take them all down.
>
> I have to think that you are tired, emotionally distraught, and simply not
> thinking straight -- because otherwise that is the scariest foreign policy I
> have ever seen publically expressed.
I'll admit it. I was tired. I'll assume that it was close to 3am when I posted
it. I know it was later than 10pm. And by 'Take them all down', I am referring
to terrorists, not Muslims.
> You know, I am not at all happy about what has happened. I know people who
> live and work near the World Trade Center. We feared for their lives (they
> are okay, BTW). Some of my people over here in CA were in a kind of shock
> all day Tuesday -- just sort of moving about frantically, blubbering
> sporadically, what have you. I know that many people are frightened, angry,
> and otherwise emotionally spent. Still, I can't really think of anything
> that justifies your stated solution to the problem. Your solution frightens
> me more than the problem itself...
My solution is no more radical then that which was used in 1945 against the
Nazis. Was that radical? I don't think so.
> You aren't even advocating the ancient "an eye for an eye" -- your
> formulation is "an eye as a preemptory strike!" I am chilled. That is NOT
> the american way that I know...
Nope. I don't believe in 'an eye for an eye', but then again I also believe in
living in a peace-loving free trade zone. I think I'll call the WTC right now
and...oh, yeah. Terrorists took that option away, didn't they?
> Please realize that there must be a thousand ways we can fix what is wrong
> in the world without violence. We can talk, negotiate, bargain, enact
> sanctions, engage in trade, etc. -- a thousand things we can do before
> lifting up a sword. If others cannot do so, then WE must be a dynamic enough
> presence in the world to stop the vicious cycle of violence begetting violence.
As I've mentioned in previous posts, all we've ever done is talk. We've never
acted. I keep hearing stories on the radio that we've deserved this for quite a
while now. Why? Because we give aid to Israel? Because we support those with a
Democratic view of things? WHAT EXACTLY DID WE DO TO ANTAGONIZE ANYONE TO THE
POINT OF TUESDAY"S DISPICABLE ACT?!? We've tried peace. We've tried talking. All
it's gotten us is a knife in the back and a group of hijacked jets rammed into
the middle of New York. Somehow, I believe we deserve better than that.
> I know you must be hurting, and I am sorry for it. Can you transform your
> anger into a more useful energy? I am sure you are a good person at heart.
> I know that you are expressing yourself from a place of hurting.
Very true. If I caould figure out a better way to use the rage within, I would.
> <3
>
> -- Hop-frog
>
> BTW, I am not suggesting we don't do things to further protect ourselves
> from future attacks. I am not opposed to bringing those responsible to
> justice (I presume through use of conspiracy laws -- maybe even through a
> concise military action elsewhere). A blanket attack against all presumed
> threats is just not the way to move forward...
Agreed. If we did that, only France and the US would exist (yeah, bad joke, but
those Canadians can be quite fearsome <snicker>)
|
|
Message is in Reply To:
 | | Re: Some other perspectives on the tragedy
|
| (...) I have to think that you are tired, emotionally distraught, and simply not thinking straight -- because otherwise that is the scariest foreign policy I have ever seen publically expressed. You know, I am not at all happy about what has (...) (23 years ago, 13-Sep-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
66 Messages in This Thread:
 
 
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
