No, I don't, because unlike you, I think the threat posed by Al Qaeda has been significantly diminished. Unfortunately, this claim really can't be verified, although it would be falsified if Al Qaeda managed to complete another major terrorist strike in the near future. We are bot getting anywhere. I think a police investigation would have significantly diminished the threat of al Qaida. that can't be verified either. Sow e're both blowing smoke. Why should our response to the perpetrators of a series of attacks like those seen on 9-11 vary depending on whether or not the responsible party was a large gang of terrorists or a state like Guatemala? What planeta re you living on? That's a really bad example. Last I checked, it was the Us that atackcked Guatemala, overthrew its govt in the 50s, installed a gang of murderers, and supportedthem through a genocidalo campaign in the 1980s. But yes, it makes a difference whether you are at war or dealing with a crime. The laws of war of significantly looser than those governing criminal investigations. One raeson is that states have resources criminal gangs don't. I understand the rhetorical move you've been trying to make: a "crime" should be responded to with only police investigation whereas a
"military attack" can justifiably be responded to with military force. Now I'm trying to see exactly why it is you think any entity that isn't recognized as a state also isn't capable of military attack, no matter how many people they kill as a result of their actions. As far as I know you are proposing a novel amendment of the laws of war. The main thing is this, which you do not seem to recognize. War is a very serious business. In war, the govt claims the right to kill lots of people, destroy their property, incur innocent casualties, set aside normal due process restraints, and so forth. It was for that reason that the Constitution embodiesa forgoten cloause stating that only Congress has the power to declare war. A criminal act, even a very serious one, ought not trigger the power oif the state to make war. If you like war, luke, you have to sign up whole hog, the USA Patriot > ACt, Camp X Ray, secret military tribunals, the works. It's your baby. That's like saying
that any supporter of WWII is committed to accepting the bombi! ng of Dresden, Nagasaki, Hiroshima et al. This war is mainly an excuse for those things. It's not about al Qaida. And, frankly, as a supporter of the war aaginst the Nazis, I suppose I think that anyone who knows the horrors wars unlease has to accept the responsibility for having unleashed them, even in a just cause. So Luke, own up. jks
--------------------------------- Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Mail Plus - Powerful. Affordable. Sign up now -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <../attachments/20021208/e71a2fc2/attachment.htm>