Carrol Cox wrote:
>
> slaughter of bystanders
>
This was wrong. "Bystanders" is simply a euphemism for the usage I condemned, "the innocent." It should read "mass killing of civilians and military" that would not otherwise have occurred. And again, the emphasis must be on the fact that this mass killing _fails_ to achieve the declared ends. Catch maybe 5 rascals and kill maybe 10,000 others (military and civilian) in the process.
Also, probably create 10 or 15 rascals to replace those caught.
And the whole thing being carried out by what everyone admits are criminal/terrorist organizations and individuals (CPD, NYPD, FBI, Carter/Reagan/Bush/Clinton/Bush administration, U.S. army (which includes many of the major criminals but also many of the components of the "collateral damage.")
And the fact that the Taliban are scoundrels doesn't count, because in case the U.S. "successfully" overthrows them they will be replaced by an equal number of equal scoundrels.
NO gain. Much loss. NO matter what policy (other than do-nothing) the U.S. follows.
If the U.S. does nothing, there will be no gain, but no loss either.
By doing something the U.S. guarantees the deaths of many more u.s. civilians by terrorist action. They killed 6000 of us; now let's commit 10,000 irrelevant murders in order to give "them" the occasion to kill 6000 more of us.
Carrol