The USA should build a coalition of civilized nations and then issue an edict similar to this: Either your government stands with the civilized nations of the world or against us, make a choice. The days of treating every country with equality are gone, the world has to change and come together to combat terrorism. If that means some tyrannical governments have to be overthrown, then so be it. Stability is essential to human survival as a species, we can not longer sit back on the sidelines and wait for these lunatics to get their hands on nuclear weapons. Are you with us or against us? A clear message must be sent. DaDakota
Sounds like Colonel Travis at the Alamo with his line in the sand. I heard former Israeli PM Netenyahu this morning. I thought he articulated the predicament well: The terrorists have had the will and are rapidly accumulating the means to rain terror on the world. We have the means to deter them but thus far have not had the political will to quash terrorism worldwide. Let's hope our will has taken an overnight turnaround because in time they will only gain more and more power through the recruitment of their own youth. We've already given him 8 years to select, train, and motivate young lieautenants to carry on this madness. We need to have the guts to make a tough decisiion to focus all our might on demolishing him and his lieautenants NOW.
Tough times require tough measures. It is the human species that is under attack, and we can not allow these lunatics to get weapons of mass destruction. These terroriists must be taken out, by any means necessary. They are the PLAGUE of the new century. DaDakota
I think its also Ironic how historical revisionists can take take a holier than thou standpoint. In the 1940's during the push for the state of Israel, leaders like Shimon Peres (Current Head of Isreal) and the late Yitzakh Rabin were on Interpol for terrorist activities and they recieved their own state. I feel their actions at the time were wrong, but now I hear a barrage of Isreali's stating this attitude of anti-terrorism but they are the ones that originated it to get their state. I do believe what DaDakota's stance is about drawing the lines with countries that are with us or against us. We can't have people acting like our friends and supporting terrorists.....!! Although I don't feel we can judge whether a country is "civilized" or not. But we must send a message, you mess with the United States and you will be terminated.....if you are a country you will have actions taken against the Governments, not bombing the civilian population that will just perpetuate hatred against the US. What did we do in Iraq? Saddam Hussien is still a dictator in power, he lived, his family and heads of government lived Yet we killed over a million innocent civilians and grunt troops that would've starved if they weren't in the army. Lets get who is responsible! The economic sanctions hurt the poor and middle class more than anyone. You think Saddam's missed a meal lately, I doubt his fat a$$ has missed one in years, but everyone else is starving and dying of disease.
I haven't seen many of the people who are deriding DaDakota offering their suggestions on what to do.
Here here Khan, that is exactly what I am saying. Take out the governments themselves. The leaders that are saying that the US is the cause of our nation being poor, all the while they pocket millions, if not billions, of dollars into private bank accounts. I just feel that we have been too tolerant of governments that openly harbor terrorists, and look what it got us. We tried to talk and treat each country equally, and look what it got us. Political correctness has no place in political discussions. It is time to start dealing in harsh realities. We are the strongest nation on the planet, and it is time to start acting like it. Send a strong CLEAR message, we will not tolerate terrorists, or anyone that harbors them. I certainly AM NOT for taking out innocent people, even if they are biased against us. I feel that understanding each other is the only way to stop hatred, and we can not get that understanding as long as governments are LYING to their people about what America, and the free world stand for. Time to act. DaDakota
<B>I haven't seen many of the people who are deriding DaDakota offering their suggestions on what to do.</B> I think it's pretty obvious what to do: retaliate and eliminate the terrorists. Do not go globe-hopping taking over any country who you feel like is "bad" and installing your own government there.
Ok Shanna, and what about governments that harbor terrorists? The point you guys are missing, is that this is not an isoloted incident, it will happen AGAIN. We have to take measures with a combined coalition to share intelligence, help each other to combat terrorism wherever it is found. Also, we have to take a proactive stance on terrorism, and take a strike first mentality. If you find a terrorist cell, anywhere in the world we should whipe them out before they do any harm. I am advocating a global WAR against Terrorism, and those that harbour or support terrorism. DaDakota
<B>Ok Shanna, and what about governments that harbor terrorists? </B> You bomb them as necessary. That lets them either change their policy or help a local opposition (the Northern Alliance, in the case of Afghanistan) then take control. The local opposition has the support of their people, but needs to be able to take credit for having gotten power. If the US goes in and puts it own people in power -- or even puts the opposition in power -- it makes that government look weak and incapable of ruling on their own. It's essential that whatever government rules has the support of its people, and the only way to accomplish that is to let the country do it on its own.
Shanna, We did exactly that in WW2 with German, Japan, and Italy, and they seem to be doing ok. DaDakota
Yep, And everyone is a critic, but no one is willing to stick their neck out and tell us what they would recommend we do. Why don't you be the first. DaDakota
Did shanna not just tell you what he thought we should do? Are you ignoring him? Just because you didn't agree or feel it was the right solution doesn't mean he didn't say what he thought was the right course of action.
I don't want to bomb anyone. I am more for a personal strike team. Bombing innocents is not in any way a part of my answer to this, I prefer a more personal approach. DaDakota PS Raven, Yes he did, and we agree on most of it.
<B>We did exactly that in WW2 with German, Japan, and Italy, and they seem to be doing ok. </B> We've already had this discussion -- all we're going to do is go in circles. That was, in my opinion, a totally different situation. I think this would be more like Yugoslavia than WWII.
Shanna, All I am saying is that we have been too light handed in our dealings these last 6o years. Yugoslavia is an excellent example, we did not finish the job, and more innocent people died. Saddam is still in power, and his people are suffering because of it. All I am asking for is a shift in policy, we have to finish what we start. DaDakota
