I wrote that in Northern Ireland I was told:
Gerry Attrick wrote that a Peruvian friend told him:
If this is such a common response, why aren't we (America) understanding it?
Muggaz and Brad: The blame game is not going to get anyone anywhere. Terrorism is currently a fact of life on this globe. The question is, how do we deal with it? In order to deal with it, we need to understand it. We can't fight this nontraditional enemy with traditional warfare; it just won't work. If we are going to use violence and warfare (ie. Brad's preferred method) we are going to have to be as cunning as the terrorist that we are fighting. However, there is a strong possibility that this will cause an intractable arrangement. Will violent responses simply breed more terrorists who conduct more violent attacks? It's very likely. If we aren't going to use violence (ie. Muggaz's choosen path), what are we going to do? We can't simply sit back and do nothing, and we are definitely not going to concede the Western way of life to appease terrorists. But, there has to be a middle ground.
I do?
alright Mug... since we're all playing the hypothetical game, and drawing up these scenarios, let me ask you this: what would you have the U.S. do in response to 9/11? Since you're not in favor of us removing Saddam from power, or hunting down Bin Laden, what is it that you would have us do instead?
You've made numerous references to our 'foreign policy', and how poor it is. What would you suggest? How should we handle things so that the world will view us more favourably? What would you have us do so that the folks in the Middle East will miraculously stop hating us & everything that we stand for?
Don't bother bringing the prison abuse scandal into this, we all know that was a fucked up situation...
BAM! You're a member of Congress for a day, what do you propose?!