September 20, 2001
4:20 PM Subscribe
posted by howa2396 at 4:31 PM on September 20, 2001
The left needs to come up with a non-ineffectual plan to address terrorism. The problem with all of the left wing proposals that I have seen is they seem to think the other guy will come around to our way of thinking if we just do something charitable. Can anyone point to a circumstance when this has worked in the past? The US and UN have been providing aid for Afghanistan for how many years? Has this helped us?
posted by phatboy at 4:31 PM on September 20, 2001
posted by elle at 4:37 PM on September 20, 2001
I dont think this is avoidable. I think the time for reconciliation has gone. No change in policy will do. No change in attitude will do and No understanding of the problem will work. No deplomatic solution through moderate Pakistanis will stand.
We need actions not words. They give words anticipating actions.
Revenge is what we want.
Revenge is what they want.
Revenge shall happen. For them and For us.
Let us see, how many of us humans survive this one.
God Bless Us All
posted by adnanbwp at 4:38 PM on September 20, 2001
posted by rebeccablood at 4:40 PM on September 20, 2001
posted by greengirl at 4:42 PM on September 20, 2001
posted by hellinskira at 4:45 PM on September 20, 2001
I take extreme issue with this. Who said "we" want revenge? What, yet another poll?
Adnan, this post is so unlike what i have come to expect from you. When did you become such a nihilist?
I have to have some faith in that the US will not blindly charge into an all-out land assault that polarizes the Muslim world. Our government has made some grave mistakes, but I have to believe they're not that stupid.
I have to have some faith that the people involved in planning the "response" are well aware what an open ground war would buy us.
And I have to have some faith that these same people, while not infallible, are at least as informed as the average MeFi reader. Say what you want about Bush, but Colin Powell is no idiot.
I refuse to believe that the President has surrounded himself with trigger-happy war hawks itching to head in to Kabul. I can't believe that. If I did, I would have thrown myself out a window at the age of eleven, when I first understood what "mutually assured destruction" meant.
Oh yeah, the butter idea is great, just don't make the same mistake by giving it to the Taliban as "humanitarian aid." I say, bomb the anti-Taliban rebels in northern Afghanistan with food and clothing.
posted by scottandrew at 5:13 PM on September 20, 2001
The points made that preventing the future of terrorist thinking and action involves preventing the cause of extremist, isolationist societies are extremely valid. I believe strongly that both a short and long term effect of not bombing Afghanistan but instead combining UN-based relief efforts and humanitarian aid with direct criminal persecution of those involved with these attacks will be to take the wind out of the sails of those demagogues who try to whip up new support among the undecided for horrific actions against The Evil Empire of America (the already converted true believers- like bin Laden or Hussein- will never be convinced otherwise, to the day they die- no action that we take as a nation will ever be satisfactory to them, so why should our response center around how they will react?). These pictures of average everyday life in Kabul remind me that most people are good people at their core but always with the potential for evil; those kids in the classroom could someday be suicide bombers themselves, but hopefully with conscientous action from all involved they will become lovers of freedom themselves, abhorring what happened on 9-11 as much as we do. Terrorists are always extremists, and the better off the people of Afghanistan are, the less likely that extremist types will flourish there- and the more likely it becomes that Afghanistan and all nations are allies against just such an extremists (as opposed to the posturing from the Taliban we're getting now), rooting them out in their own borders, cutting off their ability to be sheltered by this nation or that financial front group.
posted by hincandenza at 5:16 PM on September 20, 2001
That would most likely provoke an interesting reaction. Here we have a band of extremists who don't even let their women show any skin at all - what would be their reaction to alcohol (bad, bad, bad, not allowed) raining from the sky? Hmm...
Onto the butter thing, that type of idea has occured to me quite often in the past few days - set up well stocked refugee camps, help people get to the, word spreads, those Afghans eating grass go to them, Taleban lose popular support.. And how much would this cost? More than a B2 Stealth Bomber? (hundreds of millions of dollars??). There we go, a cheapo way that will also be a major PR coup for the US, capitalism and media sated. Nice.
Lets all just cut back on the defence spending, and spend that money instead on feeding the poor of the world. Yeah. To quote Trigun: Love and Peace.
chill out adnan, its all good and Inshallah everything will turn out for the best - the checklist for Armageddon isn't done yet =)
posted by Mossy at 5:43 PM on September 20, 2001
It's the second one today. My guess is that he's doing some reverse-psychology to see what floats and what sinks. Arguing the other side... etc etc.
posted by fooljay at 6:15 PM on September 20, 2001
posted by hellinskira at 6:53 PM on September 20, 2001
posted by ParisParamus at 7:32 PM on September 20, 2001
posted by ParisParamus at 7:34 PM on September 20, 2001
posted by hincandenza at 8:38 PM on September 20, 2001
posted by stavrosthewonderchicken at 9:26 PM on September 20, 2001
posted by whatevrnvrmind at 10:59 PM on September 20, 2001
Sounds like a porn title.
posted by adampsyche at 10:48 AM on September 21, 2001
Gosh, that sounds like porn too...
posted by whatevrnvrmind at 2:18 PM on September 21, 2001
posted by delmoi at 8:24 PM on September 21, 2001
posted by hincandenza at 9:19 PM on September 21, 2001
Presto chango!
posted by stavrosthewonderchicken at 5:36 AM on September 22, 2001
It's naive and hopelessly optimistic, but I like the sentiment. The only workable part of such a plan is that at least we won't be playing into bin Laden's hands by becoming the Middle East aggressors.
posted by skylar at 6:09 AM on September 22, 2001
It's funny how often the word "naive" has come up on Mefi lately as an dismissive tactic. It's easy to call something naive, but much tougher to make a case against it.
So let's hear it, skylar. I'm interested in why you think it won't work...
posted by fooljay at 8:02 AM on September 22, 2001
« Older Biggest Opprotunist Gasbag Award goes to... | Prescient poetry by W. H. Auden, Newer »
This thread has been archived and is closed to new comments
convert their view of the US as Evil Incarnate? a full belly and healthy children actually goes a long way toward that.
of course I think it's a brilliant plan, it just won't be implemented.
posted by rebeccablood at 4:26 PM on September 20, 2001