[Grovenet] 9/11

[Eric Canon]

--- Ron D'Eau Claire <rondec at easystreet.com>
wrote:

> Walking away is a tactic.
> We used that tactic in Vietnam.

When I say "walk away", I mean combine it with
other more effective actions. Use the police in
place of the army. Use the army for quick
response situations. In and out. Change our role
from that of occupier to the more familiar "talk
softly but carry a big stick". 


> I wonder if we'd be allowed to use it now? That
> was my question.

Allowed by who? Iraqis? The world? American
voters? I don't understand.


> The radical Islamic forces have said clearly
> that they something more than
> for us than to leave their countries. They want
> America crippled so badly it
> becomes a minor, impotent power or, best in
> their view, all non-Muslim
> Americans dead.
> 
> That's what they've been saying. I'm inclined
> to believe them. 

I believe them, too. Why would anyone have any
doubt? The question is: How do we respond
effectively? Occupying Iraq is not effective.
It's totally counter-productive.

> I heard an interesting report today from
> England. It seems that every one of
> the attempted terrorism attacks in recent
> months have been traced to one
> country. It's clear to the British that country
> has become Al Qaeda's new
> home state where they train and plan attacks
> without interference. That
> country is our supposed ally Pakistan. I have
> to wonder what's really going
> on in the Pakistani government to allow such
> widespread activity, not way up
> in the rugged mountains, but in the cities and
> other urban areas as well
> where the British have traced the terrorists.
> Recent investigations showed
> that known wanted terrorists were photographed
> as they passed through
> customs at major airports re-entering the
> country, identified positively,
> and released into Pakistan without being
> detained. 

And we give Pakistan vast amounts of aid as well.
Indeed, it is the new Afghanistan in terms of Al
Quita. We are stretched so thin we can not
respond. And President Musharraf is so reviled by
his people that he is vulnerable to any action we
might take. His body guards are only marginally
effective holding the lid down. We don't want
that lid to fly off.

Radicals have that eastern area of Pakistan as a
refuge. The radical Muslims have recently taken
Somalia. Afghanistan is reeling. Iran must now be
considered safe territory for Al Quita and the
radicals. 

Just before we invaded Iraq, there was no safe
ground for them. That is changing and has
changed. The idea that George W Bush has made us
safer is wishful thinking.
 
> It's also worth remembering that Pakistan is a
> nuclear power: they are a
> Muslim state that already has atomic bombs. 

Do they ever.

We would be stronger out of Iraq, and Iraq, I
think, would be better off as well. If we're not
tied down occupying a country, we are free again
to respond as needed. And response is needed
right now in several situations. Fear of US
response also causes those meaning us harm to
think twice. Iran and Korea are not thinking
twice these days. They are preparing for the day
when they may need to defend themselves so that
they are not visited as Iraq has been visited.
Bush has provided a window of opportunity for
them to go nuclear.