Subject:
|
Re: Response to Misinformation (Some other perspectives on the tragedy)
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.off-topic.debate
|
Date:
|
Sat, 15 Sep 2001 07:55:28 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
1020 times
|
| |
|
|
Larry writes:
> Our borders were attacked and in this day and age that may require force
> projection far far away from the actual edge of our soverignity, unfortunately.
I don't have a problem with a short and sweet black ops kinda thing executed
with as close to surgical precision as we can get. I would prefer capture
to killing for a variety reasons (i.e. no martyrs, we stay stainless before
the world, etc.). On the other hand, I keep hearing on NPR how Powel insists
that this will be a prolonged venture -- and I don't want that at all. I
can only hope that we get enough cooperation from others in the world to
keep it all mercifully short.
When these guys start talking about war I always think it has more to do
with propping up our sagging economy with war dollars and further beating
down our civil liberties in the name of national security. I oppose both.
Basically, I see this whole thing as being something not unlike trying to
capture a mass murderer. Let's catch them and bring them to justice. We
have a great opportunity to show the world that there is another solution
than just going after anyone and everyone near or around the guilty with
bombs. Let's play at cops chasing after murders -- not at cop, judge, jury
, and executioner all in one and all at once. Moreover, I am not sure that
I am convinced that there is some huge mass of supporters behind these nuts
-- just as in this country there is not actually huge support for human sack
of filth like Jerry Falwell. We must be careful to hurt as few as possible,
none if we are lucky, but let's capture those responsible.
> Could we grant a Letter of Marque to some giant corporation (say, ExxonMobil)
> and let THEM take him out in exchange for getting to keep all the oil?
Why didn't you just say, "Kick their ass, and take their gas!" as I have
heard it is said these days?
=)
But seriously, I have no problem with bringing the guilty (whomever they may
be) to trial just like at Nuremberg. Why is this unreasonable or somehow
not enough? Vengeance should have no play in our actions. No retribution
is possible -- I mean, it's not like we can kill those responsible 5000+
times. [For you Xtians -- "Let god be true though all men are sinners", or
in other words: leave the guilty for god to judge, it is not your job and it
is beyond your abilities.] Putting these nuts in the slammer should be
enough for us, because the ultimate goal should simply be to contain the
problem and forestall further bledshed. If we kill them, we are going to
give a lot of people more ammo for hatred.
Anyway, I am hardly advocating we coddle these criminals. I am suggesting,
yet again, that we simply not act from our passions because no one could
ever then pay the penalty we would exact of them.
If we can be strong, merciful, and truly righteous -- it will be a story
that rings down through the ages. We will have stayed our hands when we
could have crushed our attackers into bone-dust. We can transform a mound
of ashes into a beautiful dream of peace and cooperation amongst the people
of the world. We will have valued life over vengeance and death.
...Or did y'all think it merely ended with the conception of the democratic
republic and a system of individual rights? Let's contribute we have to
share to the betterment of the future. Let's act upon an alternative to war.
-- Hop-Frog
|
|
Message has 1 Reply:
Message is in Reply To:
66 Messages in This Thread:
  
 
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
This Message and its Replies on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
