My reply to your post :
<br>
<br>>> The problem with your argument is that you erroneously assume the two positions are mutually exclusive.
<br>
<br>My point was that several countries / governments perceive this as mutual exclusive because of their own instability due to having mixed peoples. My opinion in this matter is irrelevant.
<br>
<br>Pakistan CAN work with you in a coalition that takes in account the sensitivaties of that region. They CAN"T when you decide to do your own thing anyway. The last will spark civil unrest and eventually lead to more terrorism. This was my point or the problem I wanted to highlight.
<br>
<br>
<br>>> They are not. The attack was clearly and self evidently an attack on the US directly and we clearly have the right to respond in defense of ourselves.
<br>
<br>
<br>And I'm in no way denying you this. I just underlined the need for a well balanced response. Besides it seems to be forgotten that we're not talking about 6000 US nationals here. It was the WORLD trade centre with many nationalities working there. Nearly every country has lost citizins in that attack.
<br>
<br>
<br>>> attack on the US as an attack on all modern, western democracies that promote the anthesis of what Bin Ladin stands for, namely a free, open society run by democratically elected leaders, featuring secular states that tolerate religious freedom and believe in the technical progress of
<br>>>>human societies, relying on science and technology.
<br>
<br>
<br>This is just western propaganda. Just like everybody now is so concerned about the human rights abuses of the Taliban. We knew before the attack and couldn't care less. This is hypocracy.
<br>
<br>
<br>>>In that context, any developed country in the world could be the next target for these groups.
<br>
<br>
<br>No, I feel pretty secure that the next target will still be the USA. I have never seen any militant group scant "death to EU" or "Death to Europe" during protests. Even during the the hijjacks of the 70's and 80's nearly all planes where Isreali or American. The militants see these two countries as their enemies, I don't know why, but there is a clear trend. So a mere hatred for civilazation can't be their drive. It must be something else.
<br>
<br>
<br>>>As for poor Afghanistan (and poor they are). It is well accepted in most civilized societies that if you harbor a fugitive, you become an accomplice to his crime.
<br>
<br>
<br>Then indite him ! Come with a founded charge. That is what many countries are asking for now. Many are very willing to help but just saying that the evidence remains secret is not very encouraging to these countries. All I'm saying is that you are now putting several region under pressure and causing upheaval without any clear proof apart from your suspicion. I m also certain that quite a few countries just publically give support because they fear US counter measures, not because they really want to give support. I expect to see more cracks in the coalition later on. I say prevent and use the momentum now, give evidence and alot of voices will be silenced for the short term future. Use Islam agaist him, Proof will outcast Ossy in the Islamic world. Percecuting him without public proof will only fuel conspiracy theories that will eventually rally people to him.
<br>
<br>
<br>>>President Bush is simply applying this principle to countries. It is a shock to me that you or anyone would try to let the Afghan government off the hook for protecting Bin Ladin.
<br>
<br>
<br>I'm not letting Taliban of the hook, I'm just looking at this thing in more dept.
<br>
<br>
<br>>> Yes, the Afghan people have suffered much over the years and still suffer under their current leadership. Many of them don't support the Taliban any more after they learned what a bunch of facists they are under the guise of Islamic fundamentalism. The leaders are responsible for the current crisis. They have allowed their country to become a "nesting" and training area for these terriorists. Now is the time to damage and destroy this terriorist leadership and structure, not later when they can do even more damage with biological or chemical or nuclear weapons.
<br>
<br>
<br>It is really an illusion that one can hit terrorist leadership and structure. Honestly The Germans and Japanese in WW2 couldn't, Russia couldn't and still can not and USA was actually fighting Viethcong more than it was fighting NVA.It is even a bigger illusion to state that "Money is the life blood of terrorism" and that attacking this is enflicting a serious blow to terrorism. The whole operation on the WTC probably cost something like US$200.000 for the 8 flight lessons / certificates, US$ 8000,- for the air tickets and a few bucks for pocket knives and false ID's. This amount can be funded by the savings of 8 persons in one year or one small drug or arms deal. Hell, the Oklahoma bombing costed something that most people would blow on a weekend on the town. Just diesel oil mixed with fertilizer, a electronic timer and a rented truck.
<br>
<br>The thing you can attack are the breeding grounds and feelings of neglect.
<br>
<br>Please, people let yourselfs not be fooled by illusions and propagande despite where it comes from.
<br>
<br>
<br>>>Wouter, these people would kill you in a heartbeat as part of the decadent, modern civilization they abhor.
<br>
<br>
<br>Ohh, yeah, I don't think that I can't be hit by them. I'm just more concerned with the effects that will most definately hit me as a result of policies going wrong.
<br>
<br>
<br>>>I don't think we could appease them if we tried. Remember the lessons with the last two great facists Hitler and Stalin (yes Stalin). Appeasement didn't work and they killed millions of people.
<br>
<br>I'm not arguing for appeasement am I ? I'm just arguing for a balanced approach that will leave us winning more than we loose.
<br>
<br>
<br>>>You also bring up those "old warhorse" aguments that all liberals in our country bring up regarding the past sins of the US. No country is without "sins" if you review its history carefully and the cold war created strange and sometimes not too pleasant bedfellows. But our past sins don't bear any relationship to our responding to current actions.
<br>
<br>
<br>Never mind what we think, our though are useless in prevent these thing. Important is what they think for they believe that it is compelling enough to commit suicide attacks for it. This is my point. Together with the fact that we western nation have been acting like a cheap whore from time to time. Our love was never sincere and highly motivated by selfinterest and we had a different sweetheart every night dependend on who suited our situation best at the time. Or have you already forgotten that WE created Saddam Hussein and kept him in power. That WE now are brushing up to IRAN when yesterday it was the Evil Empire. That WE promised a solution in the Israelli/palestinian conflict when building the Gulf war coalition. That WE created and used BInny with his militants againstte russian and now are using the Russians against Binny. And so on. It is amazing how easily we swap friends.
<br>
<br>
<br>>>Yes, we helped the Taliban against the Russians and that seemed a good thing for a number of reasons, but they then turned on us. That is too bad for everyone; us and them.
<br>
<br>
<br>My point is : Why did they turn on us, as you say ?"
<br>
<br>
<br>>>But I would ask you to always consider one thing. If you had only two regimes under which to live and raise your children, would you rather do it under the US or the Taliban?
<br>
<br>
<br>What so you think !!?? I fail to say how this is relevant.
<br>
<br>>>Your disclaimers at the end of your post ring hollow when the body of your message implies a sense of support for and granting of moral equivalency to the actions of those facist, fundamentalist thugs.
<br>
<br>No, they sound hollow in your earns because you want to hear other things. things that are in agreement with your stand on things. Happy CNN viewing !
<br>
<br>Wouter
<br><br><br>