Re: [CAD_CAM_EDM_DRO] Re: WTC Tragedy

beer@... wrote:

> On 13 Sep, CAD_CAM_EDM_DRO@yahoogroups.com wrote:
> > > Peter,
> > >
> > > It just crossed on the news wires 5 minutes ago that
> > > there may be
> > > more than 20,000 dead. I light of that, and if true,
> > > Peter I ask you
> > > what would constitue over-reaction from your
> > > perspective?
> > >
> > > Mariss
>
> Over-reaction ?
>
> The death of innocent civilians who by sheer accident of birth find
> themselves weak and powerless citizens of a totalitarian regime,
> punished in retaliation for the actions of a leadership they know
> nothing about.
>
> This would constitute an over-reaction, one not far removed morally
> from the original crime.

There is a "school of thought" that feels that any people who knuckle under
a totalitarian regime and tolerate its criminal acts (in their name) are
also to blame for the barbaric acts of that totalitarian regime. I feel
that there is some merit in these thoughts.

> Thankfully, it would appear that the leadership of the US has no such
> intention; it would appear that as a nation of law, the US will obey the
> law.
>
> Your government and your President must be given the greatest of praise
> for resisting the temptation to do the easy thing and just "nuke them
> all", as has been advocated by some.
>
> It would be a tragedy beyond all reckoning if the greatest power in the
> world also became the greatest terrorist in the world, for then the bad
> guys truly would have won.

Allowing terrorists to operate freely without retribution IS, in fact,
aiding
and abetting their abominable acts. We have been far too lenient with
terrorists in the recent past, and we now see the fruits of that leniency.
I'm not advocating nuclear annihilation for all of Afghanistan (or wherever
the terrorist base is determined to be), but a severe punishment that will
make them think a long time before they ever allow another terrorist
to set up a huge camp in their country.

Jon