A Statement regarding 9.11.01 [Archive]

Web Gecko

11-09-2001, 08:42 PM

I will never forget 9.11.01 as long as I live. In my memory it will be a day of madness and terrible human tragedy. This is what happens when humans let extreme and irrational thinking take hold. Inevitably innocent people get in the way and are killed. It is so sad to see children and very poor people become victims in all this. Anger and desire for revenge are understandable emotions in these circumstances but we need to try and stand back and not let our emotions cloud our objectivity. There is too much at stake !

Every life is precious. One life lost is a great tragedy. I am not ashamed of what my heart tells me. My tears also flowed for the ones lost in the WTC and the Pentagon and their families and the grief they still suffer. We have no choice but to stand against terrorism and the madness which it engenders in it's proponents.

We must also weigh the cost of any actions we decide to take. I will fight for and defend my loved ones, country and home as will any other man. I know that innocent people were targetted and killed on 9.11.01 purposely and that the allies are making every attempt to avoid innocent people in Afghanistan being hurt. We can also try to do more here. Of course I have seen the humanitarian aid and ration packs going into Afghanistan from the US.

I don't know how but we must try, there must be a way. We must try to educate such ignorant people as to the fallacies of so devaluing life. We value and respect life in western countries. Why can't we try some form of education even if it takes years. Would one life saved make it worthwhile ?

I think president Bush made a statement recently along the lines that,
"It's our time to do something about terrorism". I agree, something must be done
in a measured, intelligent, thorough and long term sense.
But can we afford to treat this as another war (it is a very different war I know) ? There is so much at stake. The religious complications alone and the stability of many middle east countries could hinge on the decisions/actions made here. This situation affects the whole world. THere is so much at stake.

It is time to look at how this situation could be turned around to bring all nations together not to drive them apart in further death, destruction, fear and mistrust.

It is our time, to both right wrongs and turn a new page over for all humanity,
a more cooperative, fairer and peaceful world. I know some will say dream on.
But if we do not believe in the future of our race and planet then what do we believe in ? Can we afford to give up and let this thing go sour. No we must always try and never give up ! Life is both short and precious.

yours truly

The Web Gecko

p.s. We have the chance to turn the pages over
we can write what we wanna write
we gotta make ends meet before we get much older

You're the voice try to understand it
make a noise and make it clear
We're not gonna sit in silence
We're not gonna live with fear !

John Farnham The Voice Australian Artist

LawyerRon

11-09-2001, 09:04 PM

Web,
Well said. But the bottom line is this: it's us or them. They want to kill you too and everyone in Austrailia since you're all infidels too, ie, non-muslem. They won't tolerate your existence.

PS, We're sending our younger daughter to Mildura for six months as an exchange student.

dead_eye

11-09-2001, 09:08 PM

Hey, they want to kill all western muslims too.

bob

11-09-2001, 10:43 PM

I will pay for your trip to Iraq, Packistan, or the Afgaine wilds. All I ask is you wear a US or Ausie flag on your teashirt. You can make the flags just 1X1 inch and use all of the rest of the space for your peace messages.

Gintaras

11-10-2001, 01:22 AM

I, as human being, was affected on 9/11 same way as our friend Web Gecko,
but...

...I can't understand why everyone wants to avoid roots of what happened on 9/11?

Ignorance?
Lack of education?
Lack of understanding politics?
Brainwashed?

Does something like this happen in let's say Sweden, Australia, France, Austria, too many too mention....

My answer: so-called "friends".

Now,
Do anyone here have "friends" who spy on you?[read: Pollard]
Do anyone here have "friends" who think you're lower class?[gentiles can't even judge "friends", gentiles are as 2nd class people comparing to "friends"- Your, not mine, "friends" thinks so]

Would you like to have "friends" like that? Rise your hands who'd like to have "friends" like that.

United States supports a State of some very well known terrorists too, plus this countries PM is a suspect of War Crimes by murdering 1000's of refugees . Do you support IT?
-------------------------------------------------------------

Peace can be achieved non-violent way.
Want explanation?
Depends what you choose- try from this:

1)I'm a native Lithuanian and Lithuania gained Independence in 1990. It was a cost[to gain an Independence] of 13 people crushed to death under Soviet Army tanks in a capitol Vilnius near TV Tower]. No one responded to violence with violence-no further violence, no more tears.

2)Chechnya wants an Independence from Russia. I think, I don't need here much explanation about what happens when you respond to violence with violence.
Isn't 1000's[or even 10,000's of] of dead from either side enough any explanation?

Now, my question, which option[1) or 2)] you would choose?

Or here kicks in very well know by me(maybe some others) American Mentality:
[i]Everything happens somewhere else, everything happens with someone else?

Just some my thoughts about PEACE and other things.

"United We Should Stand".
We're not, if you look around carefully enough.

Gintaras

11-10-2001, 01:24 AM

Originally posted by bob
I will pay for your trip to Iraq, Packistan, or the Afgaine wilds. All I ask is you wear a US or Ausie flag on your teashirt. You can make the flags just 1X1 inch and use all of the rest of the space for your peace messages.

Way too cynical...

...and what about if I pay you for very same trip?

Gintaras

11-10-2001, 01:48 AM

Would you mind to think about:

This is from ROYAL HUNT CD album FEAR from 1999[-note this!]:

Faces Of War

Runaway's free, enemy's found
I'm on the plane, but my heart's on the ground
frozen by fear, covered in snow
pounding away in despair but somehow I know
we'll never make it back- where do we go?

On top of the world I'm a king of the hill
I'm riding the wind and horses of steel
I'm one of a kind, just open your door
to one of the faces of war

Senses are dead, reason is gone
Why do i shoot , tell me, what have they done?
Innocent kid covered in blood
hredded to pieces and left in the mud
Now I know- we'll never make it back. Where do we go?

End of the road, back to the wall
I'm kicking the dust on the spot where I'll fall
Final command- crime in disguise
Second of pain and I'm closing my eyes- now you know
We're never coming back- it's time to go
---------------------

ROYAL HUNT:
Andre Andersen
Allan Sorensen
Steen Mogensen
John West
Jacob Kjaer

Web Gecko

11-10-2001, 04:42 PM

I have to agree with LawyerRon. This does seem to be the bottom line here in the thinking of more than just one of the parties involved (us or them).
If we are thinking this way then they are probably also as well.

It is hard to understand and come to terms with thinking so extreme that engenders so much hate. And of course the desire to eridicate the other side is some sort of a solution ? I am not particularly concerned as to how I am perceived by others but then again I am no naive member of the Wonder Land peace corps either. There is nothing holy or glorious about war. War, like any other game played or battle fought produces relative winners and real losers.

Any winning outcome from war is bought with great loss of human life usually.
Most of us are fairly intelligent beings. We can use our intelligence to avoid loss of human life where possible. We all have to make choices and decide what is most important to us. I wonder how much we really value human life and what we have learnt from history. Is war more important to us ? How does that old saying go, "You don't know what you've got till it's gone". Perhaps we all need to gain an appreciation for what it means to be alive maybe then we will gain a little respect for the human state wherever it is found. If we have no appreciation of the value of life by now, I wonder how much longer we need.

It is true that the Islamic faith seems to engender extreme thinking but this is true of other systems of thought. Killing because you are jealous or have a grievance is also no solution. In this case the war on Terrorism is a bottom line practicality. We have no choice and we must stand together on this.
We also need to use discretion and intelligence as to the decisions and actions we make. This conflict has the potential for impact on a global scale if the US and it's Allies play their cards the wrong way. We cannot afford to inflame the whole Islamic world and drag everybody else in as well. A little diplomacy will help but we have to weigh priority and opportunity so it is not lost. So far the US administration has handled it's dealings with the Muslim world very intelligently. Not all Muslim people are necessarily as unbalanced in their thinking as the terrorits we are dealing with. Again I have also seen Islamic reaction to this conflict around the world. We need to think very carefully about what we do and how we proceed and how much time we may have.

My message to others who have posted on this thread is that there is always hope
as long as we maintain our perspective and apply our intelligence and resources well. I have hopes and dreams, expectations for the future like anybody else but I am also a realist. This is my bottom line. There is much injustice in this world. There is also good and bad. If there are problems then there are also solutions to be found. All we need to do is use our brains. We are too used to blaming others and putting the onus on them to produce the goods.

With this problem the buck stops with us ! So let's get off our butts, use our brains and cooperate on this. There is an important lesson here to be learnt that could also have global impact. This is a great opportunity for all the nations of the world to work together and learn how to contribute to each others' welfare. There are nations who have a history of contribution and there are others for whom it is high time. If we could motivate all nations to make some form of contribution to the affairs and wellbeing of other nations then how would this affect world affairs ? Would any perceptions change ? Would any barriers be broken down even a little ? Would this be a positive move that we could take forward into the future ? What do we really want to provide to children in third world countries ? Education and food or guns and ammunition ?

Dear Bob, your point about the 1x1 US and Ozzie flags is well taken.
If I went I would make them bigger for easier sighting ! I would also include the flags of other nations including Iraq, Pakistan, Afghanistan and whoever.
I would also scratch the peace corps messages. These people are not dumb and are not to be underestimated. Maybe we all need to learn a little more respect especially for things and people we don't understand. I submit this suggestion for your scrutiny. Perhaps the little respect we pay others and maybe a small contribution to their welfare may convince them that our motivations are not all bad.

With due respect for all

regards

The Web Gecko

p.s. Note to Lawyer Ron. I have travelled through Mildura (back in the 80s).
It is near the New South Wales , Victorian and South Australian borders
a ways west of the Riverina district (citrus growing area I think).
Adelaide and the Barossa valley nearby (wine growing area) are worth
a visit. Adelaide is a beautiful city with a feel not unlike Perth
(home). Melbourne, Victoria is an interesting place but the weather
is highly variable and generally lousy. Sydney is our big smoke and
where the action is (some beautiful features/spots in NSW).

Queensland, Cairns etc., and the Great Barrier Reef (and islands/resorts
along it's east coast) are said to be paradise like. I have not been there
myself. Then there's beautiful Perth, it's Swan River and the rest of
Western Australia, major gems in the Ozzie crown. Check out our
great South West, Broome up north (Darwin as well), the Kimberley
ranges, Kakadu and Uluru (Aire's Rock) in the Northern Territory
(tropical like Broome).

Any member of your family would be made welcome over here.
We would be happy to show you around Perth etc..
Feel free to get in touch through this forum or via my
email at markeastaugh@yahoo.com.au

chou

LawyerRon

11-10-2001, 05:19 PM

Web G,
Thanks for the thoughtful info on Australia as well as your generous offer.

Now back to what this thread is about:

Quote:
"It is hard to understand and come to terms with thinking so extreme that engenders so much hate. And of course the desire to eridicate the other side is some sort of a solution ?"

The reason you, as well as most Americans, find it hard to understand, is because you are being "logical". You are applying logic to a set of facts and the answer is not computing. The problem with this kind of thinking is that our enemy uses "faith based" reasoning, not "logic based" like you and I. Therefore, they can justify anything, even murdering thousands of people, based on their "faith", however misguided this faith is. If you think of all this in those terms, it all makes sense in a twisted way.

Web Gecko

11-10-2001, 05:34 PM

LawyerRon ,

Yes, I have to agree. Rational logic does not apply here.

There appear to be many twists and turns in the human psyche.
There are many possibilities when it comes to systems of thought.
Perhaps there is actually a twisted system of irrational logic at work here.

It is still incomprehensible to the mind how any of these terrorists
could consider they have the right to play God (so to speak) and take the
lives of so many. Whether you believe in a God or not and the other place,
they believe they are going to paradise. In reality they may be going straight to hell. At least this is what they leave behind them in their wake (the aftermath).

The whole deal smacks of the irrational and the obscene !

regards

The Web Gecko

United we should stand for the good of all

bob

11-10-2001, 07:20 PM

//"Maybe we all need to learn a little more respect especially for things and people we don't understand"//

Perhaps. How do you spell Kum-bli-ah

Web Gecko

11-10-2001, 08:13 PM

Yes I must agree that the complexity of the human psyche
tends to produce complicated systems of thought
especially when it comes to religion, emotions and the sometimes convoluted
sense of humour these different systems can produce.

Then again many people rely on a more direct sense of humour
and major in plain English.

Could you expand GAL for us ? Something some people need real bad.

I can recommend some time away from the WAN to GAL.

chou

The Web Gecko

bob

11-10-2001, 09:28 PM

GAL - Generic Array Logic. Probably best discussed in the hardware or think tank forums. :) Just being a PAL ;)

Web Gecko

11-11-2001, 07:22 AM

Bob ,

Don't mind me mate. We are all very different even if there are some things we hold in common. People everywhere have different backgrounds, personalities and outlooks on things.

If there is anything in life besides life itself that I value it is my family and all the people in my life. I guess the Internet is kind of like a global community where people can communicate, share ideas and information and collaborate on things. Nomatter what our differences I think it is important to believe in and value people. You also have to be realistic as well and be aware of different belief systems. Naivette doesn't help.

This current sutuation has me fired up a bit I guess but I believe for good reason because the things I value most are threatened ! A sense of humour is a good thing as it can help us to chill out, step back from a tangled mess and put it into perspective. Humour is something we can use to maintain our objectivity and find the solutions we need.

As to GAL (Generic Array Logic), I hadn't heard of that one. Sounds like fairly exotic stuff like Fuzzy Logic or maybe PLA (Politely Ludicrous Announcement).
Yeah I think we should cross post this stuff to hardware or Think Tank.

chou

The Web Gecko

United we should stand for the good of all

glc

11-11-2001, 02:15 PM

Let's not crosspost, please - this is a good discussion and let's just keep it in here.

bob

11-11-2001, 03:14 PM

It was I say
If there was some cross posting that would really be funny :D

pcoopers

12-04-2001, 12:06 AM

This is an old thread, maybe I should let it lie.

But, just a few days after 9-11, maybe the 16th, I was driving through
Virginia, listening to some nameless preacher.

The point of his sermon was, we, as a nation, and as Christians, are crying and
weeping now, for out own. Further, we expect all the world to cry and weep for
us. But, how many tears have we shed for the rest of the world? The most
outrageous atrocities have been commited by Idi Amin Adada, Pol Pot, King
Hussein, involving the deaths of MILLIONS of people. These atrocities make
interesting filler near the bottom of page 25 in our local newspapers, usually
months or years after the fact.

The trade center is unique in two, and only two, respects. 1, it is the largest single calamity ever commited by such a small group of terrorists, and 2, it is the first time that foreign terrorists have launched a completely successful attack on American soil.

But the killing has been going on, is going on, all around us. In our own back
yard, representatives of the Mexican government are pursuing a policy of genocide, with a tribe of native Americans at the sharp end of the stick.
Do we notice?

Who is that dufous redneck, I hear him on the radio from time to time, his
byline is "Wake up Amerrrricaa". The byline is right on target.

Web Gecko

12-07-2001, 02:56 PM

Paul Coopers makes some good points above.

I think the whole free world needs to wake up and take an in depth look at what is going on here.

It is human nature for people to focus on what directly affects them first.
If our people are hurt then we feel that first. We need to be more concerned
about the welfare of others and what happens to others due to local or international policy.

There have been many atrocities committed all over the world in the past,
some far worse than 9.11.01 (not to diminish the gravity of this heinous act).
We need to focus on not just the statistics but the cost in human grief and suffering (which has a very high financial cost - medical, family breakdown as well as the capital cost involved).

Yes, look at the Holocaust, Idi Amin, Pol Pot, RWANDA, Israel/Palestine and the list goes on.

I know the dropping of those bombs on Nagasaki and Hiroshima was necessary to end a war which if prolonged could have killed many more. I only recently got some more detail on the hell suffered by those swallowed up by the nuclear conflagration. I don't want to go into it as the reality is just too horrific.

We focus on 9.11.01 now because this is the history of our time as disturbing as it is. In Australia we reacted with a sense of horror, outrage and disbelief.
If terrorists are confident enough to act this way against the US we know they would have no qualms about doing the same in one of our cities. The whole free world is at risk.

We need to look at what we are doing in the world. Our policies don't only affect our own welfare. Look at the nightmare of Africa as one example a country
where children roam streets and villages with automatic weapons and noone is safe. Where are the arms flowing into Africa coming from and just what is the moral justification here ? Is this supply right, is it good ?

Africans like many other peoples have a history of tribal warfare. At least with
spears and less sophisticated weapons you can't do as much damage so fast as you can with automatic weapons.

Just like in Vietnam (and other conflicts) there will be enemy operatives
blending in with the local people. In Afghanistan, Taliban collaborators and
Alkaida members may be doing the same. But ordinary farmers, poor people are being hurt. It is difficult to target only the right people but we need to think more carefully about what we are doing. Many will see this as part of the necessary cost that must be paid to resolve this conflict.

The problem is that unnecessary hatred is being generated. The seeds of hatred usually bear their terrible fruit in the future. We must seek a solution to this conflict which brings people together, one which does not marginalise,
isolate or divide people or contribute to their impoverishment.

It is good to see some sort of plan being worked out for Afghanistans' future.
If we want to educate others as to the values we hold then the best way may be to demonstrate our respect for the lives and welfare of others by the appropriate actions/contribution. If we take an active role in the welfare
of other nations/peoples then they will see the truth of our stated beliefs through our actions. If we do not consider our course of action nothing will change for the better (fear, mistrust and hatred will go on).

I believe the world is at an important turning point in it's history.
Now is our time and opportunity to make a change for the betterment of all mankind. We need to look at the lessons that history can teach us otherwise we will lose our way. As time goes by our capacity to develop weapons of a more destructive nature grows.

Our attitude seems to be, "We can so we will" as if everything new that lies before us is like some Everest that must be climbed because it's there. Do we ask the question, "Should we do this just because we can ?". Like the cloning debate, people want to rush in because they can see great potential for the technology regardless of the fact that we don't really understand fully what we are doing. This is a tangent I will not dwell on but I think Xeroxing people
tampers with something which intrinsically defines who and what we are. Again it is like cheapening and devaluing an individual human life.

And this is at the heart of the matter. What is important to us ? What do we really believe in ? For me the value of human life is the bottom line.
If we hold a value we must put it into practice to prove it's potency.
This will make a difference.

Mankind is very intelligent, very smart but how wise are we ? We pride ourselves
on being mature, independant, hard working and resourcefull. How mature are we in reality ? How much has our race really progressed or matured when our basic response to conflict is still, "If you hit me, I'll hit you back !" (with something bigger generally). Have we learned what history teaches us ?
If we just react and retaliate this just generates a vicious cycle of retaliation and counter retaliation.

There is a time when negotiations must end and action is taken but there are more options open than just retaliation. We have no choice but to mature as a race and take an active interest in the welfare of others. There is no way of avoiding the necessary contribution. Current events have the potential to spiral out of control if we do not recognise the key indicators here.

Look at the reality of how the world reacts to conflict ! We don't look that wise and mature. We look like a bunch of pissed off school kids with machine guns and nukes.

It is time for mankind to grow up as a race and recognise what we hold in common as opposed to our differences. Life and humanity is common to all.
We all need food, water, shelter, clothing, medical facilities etc..
It is time for us all to take on more responsibility for the welfare of others.
We share a common home, plight and destiny. We also all suffer, cry and bleed.
We don't need that, but it is within our power to do something about it.

To the free world I say, yours is the opportunity now, you have the resources and the balance of power. Learn the lessons and be wise, take the initiative
to change things for the betterment of all humanity before it's too late.

Wake up. It could be now or never !

The Web Gecko

clydefo

12-08-2001, 08:15 AM

Web Gecko,

Your statement of the standard historical view,

“I know the dropping of those bombs on Nagasaki and Hiroshima was necessary to end a war which if prolonged could have killed many more.”

brought to mind a revisionist view that I have read.

I.e., The bombs were dropped to demonstrate to the Soviets that we had the bomb and would use it. Japan was helpless and had been suing for surrender terms for months. The notion that there would be a million casualties in an invasion of Japan was a public cover story to justify dropping the bombs. The actual estimate was closer to fifty thousand if we were to do something so foolish as to actually invade. With no navy or merchant marine, and being bombed to rubble by conventional bombing, Japan could have withstood a classic military siege for only a very short time. Food for thought.

Web Gecko

12-08-2001, 04:42 PM

Clydefo

I have not come across this revisionist history no.

Where can I read about this for myself ?

The Web Gecko

bob

12-08-2001, 05:10 PM

Web Gecko - do not waste your time reading about the revisionist view, it is bunk.

Web Gecko

12-08-2001, 07:14 PM

Hey Bob

You may be right but then you get to a stage in life where human nature no longer surprises you. Even still I like to keep an open mind and like to verify and check things out for myself. Knowing what others think gives you some perspective on how to approach problems where different people are involved.

It seems to me that if the Japanese wanted to surrender in the months before
those bombs were dropped that would be something significant. If it were true it would have been reported in the media somewhere hey (possibly not) ?

I don't go on assumption and I don't take anything on face value. I was born on
4.1.61 so what would I know about the truth of the matter ? It's hard enough getting the real facts about present day events. This applies also to the people
who lived through those events in the 40s.

I guess the question could be asked. Are there people unscrupulous enough
to sacrifice over 100,000 lives to achieve what they believe to be necessary ?
I think the sad answer (knowing human nature) is yes. Look at history. The answers are all there. The Holocaust is one valid example.

But I don't necessarily think there's any truth to the revisionist view. I think the US possibly took the view, it's either 50,000 of our people or it's
their people. Bottom line ? Everybody looks after number one.

Correct me if I'm wrong but the Japanese seemed to be very fierce fighters (look at their fuedal past - blood thirsty lot). I think taking Japan would have been very costly. If their supply lines were cut then things could have been difficult for them but then who knows how long they would have held out given a full scale allied invasion.

History tells us you can't fight the whole world on your own and win.
World domination is a delusion.

The only way things will change for the better is if nations back up their words with corresponding actions. Nations can't go on as if the welfare of others does not matter and the sun will just keep shining. Times are a changeing
and if we want less ignorance and hatred in this world we have to take some responsibility for the welfare of others.

John Lennon wrote a song called Imagine. A very idealistic song one many people would describe as ,"Pie in the Sky" or the work of a dreamer. But it could be more than a song. It speaks about something many people would like to see, a better, fairer world. Mankind has the resources to change things for the better
but lacks the will. Human nature, corruption and greed stand in our way. If you want to put it down to delusion or the impossible dream then go ahead.

We do have the power to change things if we want. There is an old saying that a house divided will fall. In these times of the global village we can see how
environment, ecology and economics are interrelated. Policy and human activity have global impacts and implications for all nations. We can no longer afford to conduct ourselves like we did in the past in our seperate nations as if others don't exist or have needs similar to ours. All mankind is related anyway.

I have heard people talk about world government and I'm not suggesting this would be a bad or a good thing. But I can see why it could come into existence.
If you wanted to co-ordinate a world effort to eradicate terrorist cells/networks then the full cooperation of all nations would help. Everybody is concerned about the Big Brother concept but how do you keep terrorism down unless you know everything about everybody ?

This is not something I want to see come about given the loss of privacy/freedom it entails. There may be people who do though.

World government could coordinate other things like the proper distribution of aid, international development projects and many other things. Of course some nations may fight against their loss of sovereignty if this was the case.
World Government is just a concept at the moment but I can see that there could be forces in the world which could drive it into existence. For example we need to change our approach to conflict. In some cases also the United Nations seems to be somewhat of a toothless tiger.

Anyways

chou for now

The Web Gecko

Gintaras

12-08-2001, 07:37 PM

Originally posted by clydefo
Web Gecko,

Your statement of the standard historical view,

“I know the dropping of those bombs on Nagasaki and Hiroshima was necessary to end a war which if prolonged could have killed many more.”

brought to mind a revisionist view that I have read.

I.e., The bombs were dropped to demonstrate to the Soviets that we had the bomb and would use it. Japan was helpless and had been suing for surrender terms for months. The notion that there would be a million casualties in an invasion of Japan was a public cover story to justify dropping the bombs. The actual estimate was closer to fifty thousand if we were to do something so foolish as to actually invade. With no navy or merchant marine, and being bombed to rubble by conventional bombing, Japan could have withstood a classic military siege for only a very short time. Food for thought.

As sick as it can be:
to show to someone something by killing 100's of 1000's?

What's that? Prozaic stimulated thinking?

If I'm wrong, then maybe Bin Laden wanted to show something to someone?
Maybe some other devil one day will show something to someone too?

KR0316

12-08-2001, 07:44 PM

This thread is very interesting learning the points of view from different people about what happened. But while people are talking about this I just wanted to know if anyone has seen this or thinks it is true. I recieved it from a friend today and want to see everyone thinks.

"Terrorist pilot Mohammad Atta blew up a bus in Israel in 1986. The Israelis captured, tried, and imprisoned him. As a part of the Oslo agreement with the Palestinians 1993, Israel had to agree to release so-called politcal prisoners. However, the Israelis would not release any with blood on their hands. The American President at the time, Bill Clinton, and his Secretary of State, Warren Christopher, insisted that all prisoners be released. Thus Mr. Atta was freed and eventually thanked the US by flying an airplane into Tower One of the World Trade Center. This was reported by many of the American TV networks at the time that the terrorists were first identified. It was censored in the US from all later reports."

Techno Student

12-08-2001, 07:59 PM

"My message to others who have posted on this thread is that there is always hope
as long as we maintain our perspective and apply our intelligence and resources well."

I spent thirteen years in the United States Army. A car accident ended my career. I were still there, I would gladly volunteer to to fight in Afganistan. you seem to have some sort of idea that America should be fair, or even-handed when dealing with foreign nations. That's just too idealistic for me.

Afganistan is a cesspool of corruption and terrorism. The fact that we are overthrowing the taliban government there can only be a good thing, both for the Afgans, and for the United States. Most of the Arab nations only respect force anyway. If we had not retaliated the way we did, the terrorists would have stepped up their activities. I'm not saying you think this way, but the idea that we should not retaliate because it might somehow anger the terror groups of the world, that is both cowardly and foolish.

Are we really the home of the free and land of the brave? Lets practice what we preach and rid the free world of these animals.

Gintaras

12-08-2001, 08:26 PM

Originally posted by Techno Student
"My message to others who have posted on this thread is that there is always hope
as long as we maintain our perspective and apply our intelligence and resources well."

I spent thirteen years in the United States Army. A car accident ended my career. I were still there, I would gladly volunteer to to fight in Afganistan. you seem to have some sort of idea that America should be fair, or even-handed when dealing with foreign nations. That's just too idealistic for me.

Afganistan is a cesspool of corruption and terrorism. The fact that we are overthrowing the taliban government there can only be a good thing, both for the Afgans, and for the United States. Most of the Arab nations only respect force anyway. If we had not retaliated the way we did, the terrorists would have stepped up their activities. I'm not saying you think this way, but the idea that we should not retaliate because it might somehow anger the terror groups of the world, that is both cowardly and foolish.

Are we really the home of the free and land of the brave? Lets practice what we preach and rid the free world of these animals.

That's a very bad thinking.
One of the reason[s] that closed my perception that US citizens are one's to blame for 9/11

Let me try to explain someting:

In 1980's, CIA and US goverment showered Bin Laden and Co. with $$$"s.
Did anyone opposed that decision?
After 10 or 20 years something happened by someone who were paid in USD's by US goverment. I assume, most supports goverment.
Now, Northern Alliance.
US goverment and CIA once again very supports Northern Alliance[a game of the name or nobody gives a s**T what will happen after 10 or so years?]

Once it will happen again, and someone to blame would be from Northern Alliance, just like Bin Laden now?
Couldn't learn from the past mistakes?
Lack of HISTORY classes in school?
Couldn't remember in which year Bin Laden was supported by US goverment and who were in charge that year?

OK, if you know who did it and who were supported by whom, WHY DO YOU DO IT AGAIN??????????

btw, US supports terrorists too. Someone somewhere(don't ask me where and who - I assume everyone knows-it were in papers about) committed terror act a couple weeks ago[bomb explosion]that 5 people were killed(some children). US didn't do nothing about :(

Corruption?
Let's not to talk about?
From Foreign policies of view, can anyone tell when last time bought someting "made in israel" besides some old cookies in 99¢ stories?
I guess, everybody isn't stupid like I'am and knows that nothing in this country is done without $$$'s.
I understand Kuwait problem- OIL, but now?

Techno Student

12-08-2001, 09:16 PM

Ginteras:

Personally, I don't care as much about the world as I do for this country, and its inhabitants. the point I make is simply this:

If we move to a tough stance on terrorism and protecting out borders, and our interests, then we would be more secure. Look as Russia, nobody picks on them.

The fact that we only do things for money or power is simply human nature. Other countries are no more or less noble than we are, with a couple of exceptions.

You do make a good point about how we fund terror groups when they are on our side, like during the cold war when the fromer Soviet Union invaded Afganastan.

We should stay the he11 out of foreign affairs unless it directly affects our borders, our country. Thats a good philosophy, but not very realistic.

And now that they blew up the world trade towers, all bets are off. The taliban had a chance to turn over Bin Laden, or at least help the U.S. find him.

The are getting what they deserve. Too bad for their people, but what about OUR people, who lost their lives.

Maybe this time the U.S. will do things right and actually help rebuild the nation, like the way we rebuilt japan after we nuked them.

Gintaras

12-08-2001, 09:38 PM

Maybe this time the U.S. will do things right and actually help rebuild the nation, like the way we rebuilt japan after we nuked them.

US are WE, nobody else will do. Like Germany did in 1933. All germans deceided in elections what someone will do to them.

If we move to a tough stance on terrorism and protecting out borders, and our interests, then we would be more secure. Look as Russia, nobody picks on them.

Russia has deceided that russians, not other religion or nationalities will govern themselves.
I think, it's not too late for americans deceide very same untill it might get too late. > learn from history of Russia anf Germany.
It's not too easy to make everyting right on big country.
It's much easier to make everything right on small country[look: Belgium- 9 mil. people]

And now that they blew up the world trade towers, all bets are off. The taliban had a chance to turn over Bin Laden, or at least help the U.S. find him

US knew pretty much of time where Bin Laden was. How couldn't you know whom you pay big $$$'s and help him?
I think, those who went to elections in 80's, who elected officials who supported Bin Laden at the time- those are to blame for 9/11. + US foreign policy, once again, someone elects those who choose such foreign policy and on whose hands the bloods is.

I'm a such very stupid person who looks more into roots why it happened and because of what reason than who it did directly.
And I think, I'm too stupid enough to care about future generations than to care about myself well being. And safe.

Techno Student

12-08-2001, 09:53 PM

You're right, we did know where Bin Laden was, it was either '94 or 95, and Syria of all countries, had some intell on Bin Laden that they wanted to give the CIA. But the Administration at that time forbade the CIA from receiving it.

Reference to your quote about America learning from Russia, or Germany, I have nothing against how this country is governed, although it does get bothersome to see partison politics play out. Still, all things considered, I think we have a pretty good government.

Techno Student

12-08-2001, 10:05 PM

Nice talking to ya Gintaras, I have to go to work now.

Gintaras

12-08-2001, 10:19 PM

Originally posted by Techno Student
Nice talking to ya Gintaras, I have to go to work now.

Most don't think it's nice to talk to me.
I have no problems with.
I'm not a majority, at least not the way majority thinks. I've seen bad and good, I had bad and good friends, I listen to everybody, but make my own decisions- no matter how bad[who doesn't] or good they are.

I was pretty good in school(~30 years ago), incl. history class.

That's all.

clydefo

12-09-2001, 10:46 AM

”Where can I read this for myself ?” Web Gecko

Atomic Diplomacy and other writings by Gar Alperovitz lay out the theory so I’m told. He is one of more well-known revisionists, I believe. I confess that I haven’t read much about the subject. bob may be correct in calling it bunk. I don’t know where I stand yet. The revisionist theory seems to me to be a better fit with the geo-political and military realities of the time.
The Soviets had declared war on Japan in August 1945 and had started seizing Japanese islands. They were perceived as a grave post-war threat to the US. The Japanese were viewed by many as being “sub-human” and deserving of retribution. They were out of rice. MacArthur had already adopted the winning strategy of simply bypassing non-strategic islands full of Japanese soldiers and letting them starve. A siege clearly would have been the best tactic. The US Military had engaged in genocide against Native Americans only seven decades earlier and, given the ruthlessness of both sides in WWII, I don’t believe they were concerned about wasting a few hundred thousand Japanese lives in order to make their point to the Soviets.

LawyerRon

12-09-2001, 11:29 AM

Quote by Techno Student:
"...you seem to have some sort of idea that America should be fair, or even-handed when dealing with foreign nations. That's just too idealistic for me."

I agree completely, there's this stupid attitude in our media now that we need to be "objective" when looking at our enemies. No we don't. We're at war now and it's us or them.

In WWII we killed over 80,000 civilians when we firebombed Tokyo in 1945. They still wouldn't surrender so it took the two atom bombs to finally convince them. Their entire population (millions of people) was ready to fight any invasion force with sticks, axes, etc, to the death. The U.S. estimated our own casualties would be in excess of 250,000 Americans killed in a mainland invasion. Millions of Japanese would have been killed. Therefore the decision to drop the a-bombs was absolutely the correct one at the time and I'm always amazed at these "revisionists" who want to "re-write history" decades later and pass moral judgment on everybody else by implying we were somehow "immoral" in our actions.

We've got to be ready to do whatever it takes in this war too. There's nothing "fair" about war so don't anyone fool themselves.

Web Gecko

12-09-2001, 12:35 PM

Howdy Techno Student

It's good to see your loyalty to your country and people. I was in no way suggesting that we need to be fair with terrorists. People who devalue and disrespect the lives of others by killing them in cold blood deserve what they get.

They should be rooted out and dealt with nomatter where they hide or who harbours them. Those harbouring and/or supporting them should be dealt with no less harshly.

I am a loyal Australian and what we share with your country is a free and peace loving society. If I am called on I will fight for my country and people as well. Australians recognise the debt they owe the US with regard to our past alliances and history. I think this should be apparent from the commitment we have already made to the fight against terrorism.

What I have been trying to express is that as far as conflict goes we still have a lot to learn. In this case action in Afghanistan against the Taliban
was necessary, yes I agree. One of the things we need to consider is the cost of any retaliative action we decide to take. As I have said above, it is difficult to only target the right people. But then taking action which causes the deaths of yet more innocent people is no real solution. Does it really make any difference on what side innocent people are killed ? None of us wants to see our people hurt but then what sense does it make to engender hate in people
who previously bore you no ill will ?

You could ask the question,"If there are 5-10 Taliban/Alkaida collaborators
or whatever in a village of 100 people, do you blow them all up to get the
5-10 bad guys ?". If everyone is collaborating then it may be justifiable
action. If there are say 10 people hiding/supporting them then killing 80 or more people is yet another human tragedy in my book. There are other ways of doing things or as they say, skinning a cat.

Don't get me wrong. I think the USs' approach to this conflict has been very measured and intelligent. I just think that the way we are still doing things are the way they have always been done. For example you could go in on the ground and the bad guys will either fight or run. I don't think the innocents will fight if they are not armed. The US and others obviously have a lot of intel being applied but there will be different approaches we have not yet tried
to sort the good guys from the bad guys.

The Afghans are not that well armed/equipped so I don't think they would pose that great a threat to well equipped allied ground units. We also have air cover which they don't.

I think it is time for countries like the US and Israel who have the resources
and the balance of power to take the necessary initiatives. But I'm not just talking about retaliatory actions. There is much more that can be done so that we can as you say, practice what we preach. If we are free and peace loving then we need to prove this to the world, not by being soft but by being both
strong and fair. We have to change our attitudes to other nations and peoples
if we are to do this.

No man, woman or nation is an island. We are all dependant on a resource/product which is produced by someone else or which comes from another nation ( e.g. oil ?). We are also all dependant upon the same natural resources
essentially. Mans' activities in every area affect world environment and ecology which in turn has an economic impact. Many of our policies have global impact on other nations/peoples. Our attitudes, policies and life style decisions do not only affect our lives. There is a tangible cost for every decision we make.

I am not criticizing the US. You have a right to feel more for your own people
than for other people. This too is human nature. I am just suggesting that we need to recognise the need to make some allowances ( within reason and where practicable) for other nations and peoples as regards their needs. This is one sure way to demonstrate to other nations the values we hold and that just because we occupy a stronger position in the world we don't just have our own interests at heart.

If we aren't prepared to change, even a little then the world won't change either (people will continue to fear, mistrust and hate). These things contribute to the seeds/roots of terrorism and other human unrest and conflict.

For example in Israel/Palestine there is a need for greater security and control of the movement of people. The Israelis should stop Palestinians from moving into their areas. If they can't live together without killiong each other then they must be physically held apart. The Palestinians are generally
pretty poor people. If they can't travel into Israel to work they will suffer.

So besides dealing out retribution what about dealing out food and other necessities to the innocent Palestinians who are suffering. Whatever we hope to achieve we must do it by example. Not all Palestinians are bad people.
Not all strap on a bomb and go blow up some Israelis. Israel should demonstrate
that they don't hate all Palestinians by helping the good ones. A new approach to conflict could help to generate a little less hate and that would be a start.

I don't pretend to have all the facts. These are very complex situations which have roots far into the past. But you can't tell me there aren't any new approaches which could be tried. We haven't exhausted all our options yet.

Mankind has the opportunity to change course and take a new path. Our attitudes
will very much seal our fate from here on in.

chou for now

The Web Gecko

p.s. As well as collaborating with and contributing to the welfare of other
peoples/nations we need to be strong in how we deal with others. Whether
it is trade, border protection or other issues which affect national
interest. Australia is still dealing with the flow of illegal immigrants
from Indonesian waters.

We need to deal with other nations from a position of strength and on
our terms. The negotiating table is where you consider the terms of the
other party. Australia is a compassionate nation and we act responsibly
when it comes to the needs of any boat people arriving in our waters.

But we have a small population and economy relative to other nations.
Our country is not a free for all and those that arrive illegally
should be sent back to their last port of departure. Genuine refugees
and those in distress are generally accepted. Our bottom line is that we
have to look after the people we already have here. We can only act within
the limits of our resources and of course we are not free of the
constraints of human nature either.

clydefo

12-09-2001, 01:07 PM

LawyerRon,

It seems to me that if an island nation is no longer a threat and has been reduced to starvation and fighting with sticks, no military strategist in his right mind would waste any blood on an invasion. Either we used the bomb because we were too impatient to wait for the Japanese to starve, or we wanted to give an object lesson to the Soviet menace. Only the latter reason seems to me to be morally defensible as a matter of national security.

bob

12-09-2001, 01:49 PM

The USSR declared war on Japan the day after the first bomb was dropped.
They invaded Manchuria the day the second bomb was dropped.
Manchuria is not an island. ;)
Even with 2 bombs and USSR joining they still did not surrender unconditionally.
We had to spare their emperor.
They were not fighting with sticks they were using Kamikaze planes and
they fought to the last man on Okinawa.

LawyerRon

12-09-2001, 04:32 PM

"Either we used the bomb because we were too impatient to wait for the Japanese to starve, or we wanted to give an object lesson to the Soviet menace. Only the latter reason seems to me to be morally defensible as a matter of national security."

It was a combination of both, plus a desire to save American lives. And both were morally defensible. We would have killed at least a million Japanese if the invasion had gone forward but I don't think that swayed our decision.

My point was the "revisionist" aren't the ones that lived through Peal Harbor and make no mistake; in the first few months after Peal, we were not sure we were going to win that war.

Gintaras

12-09-2001, 06:26 PM

Make no mistake:

Me(I guess, everyone else too)- give respect the way they are respected.

I don't respect people who approve killing other people- no matter on what "brainwashed" side they are

What the hell: Just read Ron's sig and I hope everyone understands everything

It's not about how much $ or £ or ¥ you make, it's not about that you have to go and to take IT from someone else.

It's all about that someone tell you and you believe IT. It's usually called- BRAINWASHING

I live in different world(I think, you think, she/he thinks), but I hope, one day people could understand this.
Otherwise, People(you, me , she/he) are not better than animals in some african sahara.
I mean this no matter how much $$$, but how you think

clydefo

12-09-2001, 10:18 PM

bob,
Please don't confuse me with the facts.

LawyerRon,
The main thing that causes me to doubt the standard history is the improbability of an invasion, as I see it. Imagine that the Soviets had not been a threat, and/or we did not have the bomb; with Japan already "in the bottle" I just can't envision an invasion. MacArthur seemed to commit troops only against strategically important islands. He could have just kicked back with his corncob pipe and waited them out.

Are "revisionists" so generally reviled because a few of them are flakes or is it that so many apple carts can be upset by a new telling of the story. As documents are unclassified and the FOIA is utilized, wartime propaganda can be refuted. As they say, "the first casualty of war is Truth."

bob

12-09-2001, 11:04 PM

Opps must clarify some facts. They fought to the last man in Iwo Jima and jumped off cliffs on Okinawa rather than surrender. We lost 6800 Marines on Iwo Jima and it was a small desert island.

The planned offensive was going to be Kyushu. At that point in time the Japan empire was still extended well beyond Japan.

What is this idea about waiting. We would have continued to bomb Japan and continued to be attacked by Kamikaze's. They even sent balloons with fire bombs to the US. They were working on biological payloads involving disease carrying fleas.

Should we have just waited?

pcoopers

12-09-2001, 11:08 PM

One little bit of info I've picked up from all the documentaries:

The body bag boys all through the Pacific campaign, had to plan ahead to have enough body bags on hand for each battle. It would be detrimental to morale to have too many, but a logistical disaster, not to mention a health problem to have to few. Those boys, like everyone else, got to be pretty damn good at their jobs. The margin of error worked out to be something less than 10%.

For the invasion of Japan, those men said, and I believe, there would have been near 1/4 million body bags needed, that's not even touching wounded.

Another piece of info: There were an ungodly number of purple heart medals prepared for the japanese invasion. Purple hearts that were not used, and were subsequently issued to Korea wounded, Vietnam wounded, and every other action we have been engaged in. Know what? There is still a mountain of Purple Hearts unused in warehouses around this country.

I don't know where Clydefo got his info regarding the planned invasion, Perhaps he discounts the potency of a divine emporer, or supposes that no other people than Americans are capaable of genuine heroism.

In comparison, Normandy was a walk in the park, and Normandy was really close to hell. Given a choice, I'd rather walk up Iwo Jima, and God knows that was next door to hell.

bob

12-09-2001, 11:26 PM

pcoopers, my post refers to events in 1945 ;)

pcoopers

12-09-2001, 11:35 PM

You ask "Are revisionists so reviled"

I say yes. I'm 45 yrs old. My daddy came home from Guadalcanal, in pieces. An uncle walked into Trblinka. I have talked to many others, some kin, others not kin to me. I have also read voraciously all my life, and from all that, I have a good idea what happened in WWII.

Does that mean we were the "good guy" all the time? Of course not. I never heard anyone say that the US was 100% right, and clean, and blame free throughout the war. There are questions about Pearl Harbor that have never been adequately
answered. If we cracked the code a week ahead of time, why wasn't Pearl on at least level 2 alert, why were they surprised? We dropped the ball, of course.

Right and wrong aside, getting the facts straight is important because:

THEY WHO WON'T LEARN THE LESSONS OF HISTORY, ARE CONDEMNED TO REPEAT THE MISTAKES OF THEIR FATHERS!

Have you never wondered, Just how did Hitler gain power? Or just how was it that the German people followed the Gestapo into the policy of Genocide? The answers are there, still. You should go look, before they burn the last of the books. It is important to look soon, because in small, incremental steps, the USA is following in their footsteps. Someday, you, or perhaps your grandchildren will wonder how we arrived at the place we will be then. I can tell you, as can many a tyrant.

Don't ask the revisionists. They are the ones who want to see the US turned into a police state. Communism has blinded us to all other perils for so long, we have forgotten there are other perils. Get the facts, and think for yourself.

pcoopers

12-09-2001, 11:45 PM

I was referring to planning for invasion, is why I said 1944.

I double checked VJ day, it was August 6 '45, so '44 was a little off, even so.

The real planning probably only started about Feb of '45.

bob

12-09-2001, 11:56 PM

Kyushu was planned for November 1945.
The planning for Japan's defeat started December 7, 1941. (if not before ;) )
Enough on dates anyways. As long as someone does not try to revise them :D

clydefo

12-10-2001, 08:44 AM

"Should we have just waited?" -bob

I know it's un-American to suggest anything other than instant gratification, but yes, we should have. Siege is the best of all military strategies, IMO. It minimizes loss of resources, your own and those of the enemy, which you will ultimately capture. It just takes patience.

With total air and naval superiority, and continued bombing, it's hard to imagine the kamikaze attacks could have gone on very long.
Balloon and flea tactics just go to illustrate that they were at the end of their rope. Japan was essentially one large, isolated concentration camp.

"I don't know where Clydefo got his info regarding the planned invasion, Perhaps he discounts the potency of a divine emporer, or supposes that no other people than Americans are capaable of genuine heroism." -pcoopers

I get all the best stuff from the PCMechanic forums. I don't think anyone doubts that the Japanese would have resisted an invasion heroically, even fanatically. All the more reason to isolate them and wait them out.

"Don't ask the revisionists. They are the ones who want to see the US turned into a police state." -pcoopers

Are we talking about the same thing? I'm referring to historians who attempt to offer a more accurate account of past events as more facts come to light. Like the folks waiting for Bush to stop resisting the release of documents pertaining to the Iran-Contra conspiracy. BTW, would someone please tell me the reason that RR fired Oliver North?

Web Gecko

12-10-2001, 12:08 PM

The following quote from PCOOPERS post above pretty much says it for me :

Right and wrong aside, getting the facts straight is important because:

THEY WHO WON'T LEARN THE LESSONS OF HISTORY, ARE CONDEMNED TO REPEAT THE MISTAKES OF THEIR FATHERS!

I remember a few years ago seeing someone wearing a T-Shirt that stated
"Attitude is Everything !". As far as human affairs are concerned our thoughts
and attitudes make the world we know. Facts are important but it is what we get
from them that is significant.

Just like with science, technology and computers we usually seek to expand our horizons via new solutions, products and approaches. I am a firm believer that for every goal there is a better, more efficient way to reach the targetted objective. Maybe clydefo (correct me if I'm wrong) is suggesting that a siege may have been a more efficient solution in terms of conservation of human life.

Thanks to the discussions of the folks above I have a better insight into that history (still sketchy for someone born in 1961). Some of the ghastly reality of those nukes that were dropped were of people with burning, melting bodies
throwing themselves into water only to die in agony without any relief. Hopefully they died fast. The firebombing sounds no less gruesome.

Change is something we tend to resist vehemently. I am not in a position to
make moral judgements about the actions of others, especially regarding events
that took place before I was even a twinkle in anyones' eye.

As far as I can see we still refuse to learn the lessons history teaches us.
The human tradgedy goes on. What those people in the WTC towers (and firefighters, police etc., on the ground) and Pentagon must have experienced
was truly horrific. Like those heroic phone calls from those lucky enough to have the opportunity to make them, "Hello, I love you, Goodbye !" knowing death was seconds away. No words can adequately cover this and the loss that follows.

Facts are important but what we do with them is more important. Crazy murderers acted and innocent people got in the way. Now we must act and more innocent people are getting in the way. This is the ongoing tradgedy that our attitudes are sucking us into. In a war yes, it's kill or be killed, us or them.

Do we know who our enemies are this time ? Next time they could be relatives of more innocents who were killed. When we move from Afghsanistan to our next target will the expediency of us and them be acceptable when more innocents
get in the way ? Where does this end ? It doesn't and history proves that reprisal leads to counter reprisal and so on round the vicous circle. No I am not suggesting that we don't act just that reprisal is not our only option.

We are being sucked back into the whirlpool of past mistakes and we can't even see it. I remember reading somewhere about a past conflict, "Winning the hearts and minds of the people". Apart from necessary action we should also be focussing on how we can bring as many who could become our enemies in future
round to our side.

With some thought and forsight and a little creativity/planning there are people with the resources (and talent) who will be able to make the necessary changes. We should use every tool available to us not just military action.

We should never abandon our objectivity. Without it how will we be able to reason and plan our next move ? This is not relative to combatants in the field but to the planners.

Whether we accept the responsibility for change or not the future may literally be in our hands right now.

The Web Gecko

p.s. Human society and activity is based on change which is actually
necessary to our welfare and vitality. I am for ongoing change including
our attitudes. It is time for us to stop compiling lists of statistics
and to start finding solutions that make these lists obsolete.

pcoopers

12-10-2001, 08:27 PM

Attitudes do change.

25 years ago, I volunteered for every assignment I could, mostly Med and Mideast.
I figured then, if Armageddon was coming, I wanted a front row seat at the battle of all battles. Win or lose, even if I couldn't stick around to see it through,
it would be a sight to see.

Today, I anxiously watch the news. I fear the possibility that these are the opening shots in the next "100 year war". Yes, Armageddon would be a sight to see, but I'd rather not my sons have to see it.

Worst of all, I don't want them approaching me in the afterlife, and gloating that they saw what I missed. That would really suck!

The real point is, today I understand, somebody's son dies in every battle.

Hosie

12-13-2001, 01:24 AM

I have a question for Gintaras...have you ever thought why we are supporting the northern alliance? 1. It is their country, they are citizens of afganistan and should be given the chance to try to right the wrongs that other members of their country have done. 2. It saves US lives, every member of the northern alliance that fights against the taliban is one less american soldier that has to put his life on the line for YOU. 3. The members of the northern alliance know how to fight the battles they are fighting, they know the enemy better, they know the terrain better. My question is this, if you do not approve of the US supporting the NA, would you take up arms and go after the taliban? Like it or not they, like all the brave US soldier over there are fighting and dying for us.

Gintaras wrote:
Peace can be achieved non-violent way.
Want explanation?
Depends what you choose- try from this:

1)I'm a native Lithuanian and Lithuania gained Independence in 1990. It was a cost[to gain an Independence] of 13 people crushed to death under Soviet Army tanks in a capitol Vilnius near TV Tower]. No one responded to violence with violence-no further violence, no more tears.

2)Chechnya wants an Independence from Russia. I think, I don't need here much explanation about what happens when you respond to violence with violence.
Isn't 1000's[or even 10,000's of] of dead from either side enough any explanation?

Now, my question, which option[1) or 2)] you would choose?

The Jews in WWII did not have an army, they did not fight back against the Germans, and they were killed by the millions. Non-violence does not promote non-violence