Do you not think that some type of military action even if limited and largely symbolic is necessary? Israel's actions seem to be directed not just at perpetrators but much more widely. Bulldozing houses etc. shelling police stations is hardly any sort of direct attack on the terrorists themselves or shooting stone throwing protestors.
Cheers, Ken Hanly
----- Original Message ----- From: "Michael Perelman" <michael at ecst.csuchico.edu> To: <lbo-talk at lists.panix.com> Sent: Friday, October 05, 2001 12:51 PM Subject: Re: Blair's evidence against Bin Laden
> Would the terrorists be silly enough to wait in a training camp. Isn't
> the usual tactic to disperse and wait and then attack when the invader is
> most vulnerable? Say, to shoot a couple of soldiers who wander off.
> Then, the invader retaliates in a way that wins sympathy for the
> terrorist.
>
> If this sort of tactic is so good, why haven't the Israeli assinations
> brought peace?
>
> On Fri, Oct 05, 2001 at 12:31:50PM -0500, Ken Hanly wrote:
> > But when commandos enter terrorist training camps or whatever attempting
to
> > arrest suspected terrorists surely they are bound to encounter
resistance.
> > Are the commandos simply to surround a camp as police might surround a
house
> > and use tear gas or whatever to get them out. In a situation where the
area
> > is controlled by the Taliban or bin Laden supporters this is hardly an
> > option.
> > The other main reason I have for supporting limited intervention to
> > "bring justice" to the terrorists is that this seems to be the minimal
> > response politically possible, even if it is not desirable in the
abstract.
> > Should public opinion suddenly turn against Bush, he may be forced into
> > dramatic and reckless action to placate the people and regain his
> > popularity.
> > I question the possibility of any terrorists getting a fair trial
> > anywhere in the present climate of opinion. Neither bringing justice to
the
> > terrorists or the terrorists to justice will involve much justice.
However,
> > it may to a limited extentm but only if accompanied by a whole range of
> > other policies, reduce the power of terrorism.
> >
> > Cheers, Ken Hanly
> > ----- Original Message -----
> > From: "Ian Murray" <seamus2001 at home.com>
> > To: <lbo-talk at lists.panix.com>
> > Sent: Friday, October 05, 2001 10:58 AM
> > Subject: Re: Blair's evidence against Bin Laden
> >
> >
> > >
> > > From: "Wojtek Sokolowski" <sokol at jhu.edu>
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > > At 08:06 AM 10/5/01 -0700, Ian wrote:
> > > > >Heaven forbid we should disagree and attempt to use collective
> > > action
> > > > >to thwart the will of Congress.
> > > > >
> > > >
> > > > Ian, you can do what you want. But it would be only fair if you &
> > > Co. offer
> > > > *your own* cheek to Mr. Bin Laden and his supporters. I'd rather be
> > > safe
> > > > than sorry - hence I support killing these folks by any means
> > > necessary,
> > > > even if evidence against them falls somewhat short of high legals
> > > standards
> > > > set by judicial purists. Better red than dead - remember that old
> > > saying?
> > > >
> > > > wojtek
> > >
> > > ==============
> > > No one is for offering their cheek to OBL and his supporters. The
> > > notion that by killing off one network we're going to rid the US of
> > > the biggest foreign policy crisis of the 21st century is a joke and if
> > > we don't attempt to use, as we struggle to evolve, international legal
> > > standards of due process etc. will simply repeat all the horrors of
> > > the last century. Should the British Army simply go out and kill the
> > > IRA, should Israel just continue to kill Palestinians, yaddah yaddah,
> > > should "we" be Hobbesian cynics forever blissful in "our" cynicism? Do
> > > we really want this century to produce as many weapons and weapons
> > > lovers as last century?
> > >
> > > You're never safe.
> > >
> > > Ian
> > >
> > > "Your tyranny I was part of is now cracking on every side and your
> > > whole life is in danger your empire is on fire." [Front 242]
> > >
> >
>
> --
> Michael Perelman
> Economics Department
> California State University
> Chico, CA 95929
>
> Tel. 530-898-5321
> E-Mail michael at ecst.csuchico.edu