[FoRK] bin Laden offers truce & why that's unacceptable

Stephen D. Williams sdw at lig.net
Thu Jan 19 15:55:12 PST 2006

I should pick a different point of view every week.

I guess that whole califate thing isn't working out so swell at the moment?
I keep thinking that they were thinking that if they dropped the "World 
Trade Centers" that the world economy would suffer a severe hit.  Not 
much else explains their fixation with that target.


Lucas Gonze wrote:
> Uh, bin Laden was not assuming we wouldn't smack back.  The opposite 
> -- the plan was to incite us to get involved militarily in the middle 
> east, which would incite a global war that led to the califate being 
> reestablished.  Our bull in a china shop response was exactly the 
> purpose.
> On Thu, 19 Jan 2006, Stephen D. Williams wrote:
>> <MadAmericanRant>
>> He/they should have started with a truce.  And didn't the attacks 
>> already reach our shores?  The long arm of the American giant woken 
>> by 9/11 won't stop until ObL and anyone working with him are no 
>> longer free.  It's messy, ridiculously costly, and half (at least) 
>> the decisions are between misguided and illegal, but it will be a 
>> while before someone questions America's willingness to smack someone 
>> back who smacks us.  The US won't run out of money, and we've only 
>> begun to get creative about solving the problem.  If I were in 
>> charge, I would have placed emphasis on both muslim-native 
>> infiltration and technology to automatically suppress shots / 
>> missiles in a fire zone.  There have been projects to do the latter, 
>> but I'd be rushing them to test and funding competition until I could 
>> run automated vehicle convoys non-stop to draw fire, fire back, scope 
>> out mines, and provide cover for vehicles with human passengers.
>> Right now, I'd be providing favor to peaceful areas and immediate 
>> sanctions on insurgent areas until locals helped themselves.
>> Overall, I'd have an intensive education program for Iraq and 
>> Afghanistan that explains democracy, lawful society, philosophical 
>> differences, progressive rather than regressive ideas, etc.  I'd even 
>> have a program to pair Iraqi families with American or European 
>> families.
>> My impression is that part of the reason that Bush was reelected was 
>> that a significant portion of voters wanted to make sure we kept a 
>> bull in the china until the "job is done", damn the consequences.  
>> The mistake of those now-terrorists (ObL & co.) who thought America 
>> was weak because we had a civilized and/or apparently bumbling leader 
>> is that they don't get that the effective personality of the country 
>> can change every 4 years, sometimes drastically, and there are 
>> infinite resources and adaptability available if really necessary.  
>> Consider that all of the troops, money, effort, technology, fuel, and 
>> other resources have had no measurable-to-the-average person cost so 
>> far in the US.  The key component of winning WWII was, I believe, 
>> factory production in the US along with a few good decisions. 
>> Different kind of war of course, but consider the kinds of automated 
>> technology and communication that we could now produce.  Imagine 
>> every border crossing, road, and public place having automated 
>> biometric surveillance with continuous identification and tracking.  
>> Big American Brother indeed.
>> I'd prefer to get civilized and intelligent back in office, but I 
>> want some parts of the world to learn a lesson too: Don't act like 
>> barbarians (to us especially) or we'll get medieval back.
>> Now, of course Iraqis (at least the ones who were in Iraq when they 
>> were "liberated") aren't the same as ObL's crew, but there are those 
>> now who seem to have the same viewpoints and drive to kill and 
>> resistance to modernity.
>> </MadAmericanRant>
>> sdw
>> Lorin Rivers wrote:
>>> According to CNN in the audio tape purported to be from ObL:
>>> "In response to the substance of the polls in the U.S., which indicate
>>> that Americans do not want to fight Muslims on Muslim land, nor do
>>> they want Muslims to fight them on their land, we do not mind offering
>>> a long-term truce based on just conditions that we will stick to.
>>> "We are a nation that God banned from lying and stabbing others in the
>>> back. Hence, both parties of the truce will enjoy stability and
>>> security to rebuild Iraq and Afghanistan, which were destroyed by war.
>>> "There is no problem in this solution, but it will prevent hundreds of
>>> billions from going to influential people and warlords in America --
>>> those who supported Bush's electoral campaign. And from this, we can
>>> understand Bush and his gang's insistence on continuing the war," the
>>> voice said.
>>> White House spokesman Scott McClellan said the tape suggested bin
>>> Laden was "under pressure." He also dismissed the idea of a truce,
>>> saying, "We must confront threats before it is too late...before the
>>> attacks reach our shores."
>>> McClellan continued "Have you seen Haliburton's stock price? I can be
>>> a tool all day long for that kind of money!"
>>> (last bit is mine, obviously) but ObL seems to have hit the nail on 
>>> the head...
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> FoRK mailing list
>>> http://xent.com/mailman/listinfo/fork
>> _______________________________________________
>> FoRK mailing list
>> http://xent.com/mailman/listinfo/fork
> _______________________________________________
> FoRK mailing list
> http://xent.com/mailman/listinfo/fork

FoRK mailing list
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://xent.com/pipermail/fork/attachments/20060119/8483ae42/attachment.htm

More information about the FoRK mailing list