quote:

---

My argument is about the hypocricy involved. It just APPEARS TO ME that they are defending minorities that will get them good publicity.

---

Speaking of oppression, get your entry in today!

---
"Jelly-belly gigglin, dancin and a-wigglin, honey that's the way I am!" Janice the Muppet

Wow... thick, chunky politics in large portions! I love the huge variety of stuff we talk about on this forum. Brad must be constantly amazed at what his little hobby-site keeps turning out. :)

For those who wanted the article my friend wrote: Here it is.

Now, I will just point out right now that this article does not defend the terrorists' actions in any way, but simply questions the justifications given by the US government to rationalise their attacks on Afghanistan from the perspective of international laws and treaties, and encourages anyone who is persuaded by his argument to contact their government representatives and make their views known.

Basically, along the lines of what has already been said, you can't end violence with violence, and you can't prevent killing by engaging in killing.

ObiJo, I sympathise with the grief of your nation - I was in numb shock for almost a week after the attacks, as that old "breaking news" thread will attest - but the fact is that this issue needs to be discussed now, because the events it pertains to are happening now. If the current US military action in the Middle East is wrong, and I believe it is, right now is the time to talk about it, and now is the time to speak out against it, and... well, that's what I am doing, in my pathetic little way.

Basically, international law cannot be enforced by anyone... except the citizens of democratic countries, when they vote, when they write to their government representatives, and when they publicly debate issues.

Right, now I am taking my soapbox and going to bed. :)

---
This signature has performed an illegal operation and has been shut down.

Just don't expect very many Americans to be receptive. It's too soon. People are still bleary-eyed at the national anthem at ballgames and bedecking their Fords with American flags. I'm sure you can get others who feel the same way to agree with you, but if you're trying to convince Americans who don't, your timing is off. It's too early for many of us, and even appears somewhat insensitive. (Though I know this wasn't your intent.)

I personally disagree with your opinion on going after the terrorists. Despite any wrongs the US military has done in the past, I have little doubt that our assault on the Taliban in pursuit of Bin Laden is more than justified by the 6000+ we have laying in our morgue or buried under 220 stories of rubble.

---
I ate a hooker half a bottle of knife.

Whatever our political alignments, we can all agree on this.

---
What others say about boorite!

DexX,

I take no offense from your friend's opinion. For at least three decades, I have had virtually no trust in the integrity our government, though to paraphrase Chuchill, it does seem to be preferable to most of the alternatives out there.

I got a call from my father a week or two after the attacks, when there were some pacifists demonstrating in Washington. My dad expressed the opinion roughly that they should be shot. I don't agree at all with that; even if I might think they are wrong on this issue, I am damn glad they are providing a wee bit of dissent, keeping the war machine and the press honest if you will, forcing the hawks to justify themselves and not act on a blank check.

That said, as a Jew, I am a member of a community that for over half a century has said, "never again!" in the light of the unspeakable obscenity it suffered at the hands of others. Now, as an American, I am a member of a second community who can, without the least bit of irony, raise that as its battle cry.

My feeling is that this should never happen again! Not to us, not to Australia, not to Israel, not to the Palestinians, not to anyone. Action must be taken so that these vermin can never again commit the blasphemies and crimes against humanity with which they have fouled our planet.

Now if your friend has a constructive solution that will work better than the one the US government has initiated, I'd love to hear about it and perhaps debate its merits. Until then, I'm acting under the assumption that what is being done is reasonably close to the optimal way to neutralize this scourge at a minimal cost to others.

---
ken.kaufman@gmail.com

quote:

---

You actually liked one of the two candidates? I thought they were both extremely weak.

Though I was happy to see Bush win, for the reason you stated in your italicized quote above. Plus, it's making you democrats do what we republicans had to do during Clinton's eight years: live with a president you consider a complete joke.

---

quote:

---

Just don't expect very many Americans to be receptive. It's too soon. People are still bleary-eyed at the national anthem at ballgames and bedecking their Fords with American flags. I'm sure you can get others who feel the same way to agree with you, but if you're trying to convince Americans who don't, your timing is off. It's too early for many of us, and even appears somewhat insensitive. (Though I know this wasn't your intent.)

---

quote:

---

Basically, along the lines of what has already been said, you can't end violence with violence, and you can't prevent killing by engaging in killing.

---

Overthrowing the Taliban will create a whole lot of new problems, though. What should replace them? The Northern Alliance? That won't solve any of the humanitarian problems in Afghanistan, and they'll just end up being the new American-armed threat to the west.

The christian right is really the only group out there with balls enough to stand up for pro-lifers. Between the media portraying those of us ghastly enough to believe in a child's right to live in a negative light, and the myriad special interest groups advocating pro-choice, the christian coalition stands out as really the only beacon of advocacy we have. And it's exactly that shortage of pro-life advocacy groups that leads an atheist like me towards the unlikely and somewhat unwanted position of supporting the christian coalition.

I'm saying that you're not going to convince most Americans right now. You can either choose to speak out against the American military now, when emotions are still high, or later, when thing's have settled. It's my opinion if you do it now, you'll harden most Americans against your anti-military sentiment because of the high emotions and the sense that it's unpatriotic to disagree with anything American at this time. If you do it later, you'll admittedly have to let lie your opinions about Afghanistan (opinions as I've stated I don't share), but you won't have hurt your chances of getting Americans to agree with the larger issue which is the general inappropriate actions of the US military. (An opinion I do share.)

Of course, I'm thinking more on the macro scale. Along the lines of how the media might handle it dealing with the American people on the whole. There's no stereotyping individuals.

I don't. I was specifically talking about DexX's post of a webpage that I interpreted saying going into Afghanistan and battling the Taliban to get to Bin Laden is illegal under international law.

---
I ate a hooker half a bottle of knife.

quote:

---

That said, as a Jew, I am a member of a community that for over half a century has said, "never again!" in the light of the unspeakable obscenity it suffered at the hands of others. Now, as an American, I am a member of a second community who can, without the least bit of irony, raise that as its battle cry.

---

quote:

---

I'm saying that you're not going to convince most Americans right now. You can either choose to speak out against the American military now, when emotions are still high, or later, when thing's have settled. It's my opinion if you do it now, you'll harden most Americans against your anti-military sentiment because of the high emotions and the sense that it's unpatriotic to disagree with anything American at this time. . . .

---

McCain was by far the most popular candidate in the last election, judging by the number of Democrats who crossed party lines to vote for him. But the two-party system got us again. I've recently become an anarchist because of... well, everything I've learned over the years.

---
"Only things I approve of should exist." -some guy on the internet

quote:

---

Overthrowing the Taliban will create a whole lot of new problems, though. What should replace them? The Northern Alliance? That won't solve any of the humanitarian problems in Afghanistan, and they'll just end up being the new American-armed threat to the west.

---

Two words: Richard Gere.

Other than that, I can't think of any response that wouldn't just be repeating myself.

---
I ate a hooker half a bottle of knife.

Frankly, I don't think we should bomb them. What good is that going to do? The terrorists aren't afraid of dying, they think they're going to heaven. I say we dump melted pig fat on the suckers. NO HEAVEN FOR YOU MISTER TERRORIST!

---
Do you want ants? Because that's how you get ants.

Osama bin Laden has pretty much managed to do that for the Afghani nation without us. The ones he deemed worthy to fight his cause were paid in opium and heroin. (Wait until all of the non-smoking and non-pork-eating, snot-nosed junkies find out that they are eligible for an eternity in the bosom of Allah.) What a guy, eh? The older you get, the more you realise that some things are just plain fucking wrong and that you can piss and moan about them or create ostensibly high-minded and intellectually clever arguments about them until your gums bleed, but they are still plain wrong. Then you either put your shoulder to the wheel or fuck off home and close the blinds until everything is easy again.

---
I wanted my half in the middle and I wound up on the edge.

quote:

---

I agree that criticism of the government is seen as unpatriotic right now, which is so absurd I can't parody it.

---

I wish I knew how or whether this statement addresses the bombing or anything else we're talking about. Are you saying that we should either bomb Afghanistan or "fuck off home and close the blinds?" Are you saying that criticizing the bombing is closing the blinds? Because I don't see how scrutinizing policy is closing the blinds. Quite the opposite.

Are you saying that arguments presented here against the bombing are "ostensibly high-minded and intellectually clever?" Because they seem pretty straightforward to me. What is so hard to understand about them?

When you put down those of us who "piss and moan," are you saying we should be tougher when it comes to the suffering of others? I don't get it.

---
What others say about boorite!

I'm usually fairly opinionated about politics and policy and issues. I was asked how I feel about the attack on Afghantistan, and I had to come to the realization that I am fairly indifferent about it. I've been against most of the military action that the US has been involved in in the past, but mainly because it was all based on us policing the activities of other nations and protecting financial interests with human lives. This action, while indeed a retaliation-and-prevention measure rather than a "defensive" measure, just seems a hell of a lot more justifiable to me. I dislike the fact that there are plenty of innocents who will suffer for this, but I have no other suggestions. Do you?

Seriously, if anyone has some viable suggestions for how to handle this that beat what we're doing now, speak up.

---
I am a delicate fucking flower. https://beacons.ai/jesskent

See above. There are international legal mechanisms in place for prosecuting terrorists.

Even if there weren't, we would need to examine the current strategy, as it does not make us more secure but less. It increases the probability of further attacks (and even civil war in friendly countries) by inflaming anti-US sentiments abroad.

Furthermore, the bombing will not get Bin Laden and is not expected to (NPR quoted the White House as saying so this morning).

Lastly, as you pointed out, "plenty of innocents will suffer for" Washington's actions, which under the circumstances flatly rules out the bombing on moral grounds. As it stands, we're placing ourselves in much the same position as the terrorists: harming civilians to achieve our political aims because "nothing else works." (This is old hat for Washington, as I'm sure you know from your previous war opposition.)

Again: We're not permitted to form a mob and shoot up the neighborhood in search of a serial killer, whether or not anyone can think up a "viable alternative." That there is a viable alternative only strengthens the case against the bombing.

---
What others say about boorite!

quote:

---

Two words: Richard Gere.

---

We Americans are tough that way.

But seriously, I think that's a fair and honest summary of how most Americans feel, not just about this but about much of US foreign policy. I'd say it signals a huge PR victory for Washington. I also think we indulge our indifference at our gravest risk. Exhibit A: 9/11.

---
What others say about boorite!

I should say it with comics. Sorry, I forgot where I was.

[Click to view comic: 'Extremely foreign policy']

---
What others say about boorite!