Posted on 09/12/2001 6:33:24 PM PDT by elfman2
This is more extreme that is being spoken of by responsible officials, but I think that it offers the best hope of a complete success in our war against terrorism. I think anything less would result in remnant cells that would eventually go nuclear on us.
1 Create a list of every significant active terrorist group that has either attacked US interests, declared war on the US or actively aligned with those who have.
2 Identify all host nations of these groups that are not aggressively pursuing them.
3 Prioritize the list, starting with the biggest offenders.
4 Publish the list and enlist international support. Confirm who is with us and who is against us.
5 Select one nation at a time and demand the immediate forfeiture of all identified terrorists and the destruction of their facilities. If the host nation claims that they are unable to promptly do so, let them know that we are going in to come in and get them ourselves. Let them know we will be at war and the government will be replaced if any significant resistance is either encountered or threatened from government forces.
We probably can't do it alone with our weakened military, but we'd likely "only" have to fight one or two wars against nations like Iraq, Syria, Libya, Afghanistan, Turkmenistan or the Sudan. Once our resolve was demonstrated there, other nations would not mount a military resistance to our presence.
I don’t think that we can wait to start for more than a few weeks. International sympathy and support will soon evaporate. And we can't afford not to do this in its totality. We soon will not know with certainty that these organizations don't have nuclear devices. We probably would not recover as the dominant world power if the NY & DC strikes had been nuclear. We would be set back for decades. In addition to the loss of life, that's what we risk by not acting fully and acting now.
Dancers on the West Bank, for instance...
After stealth and tomahawk attacks take out all air defences, an agressive week long leaflet bombing campaign delivering this message.
Inasmuch as the government and certain citizens of your country have given aid, comfort, and refuge to organizations and individuals who have committed acts of war against the United States, you will now be subjected to a temporary full scale military occupation.
If you send up a plane, we will send a fleet of bombers.
If you send up a missile we will send 100 tanks.
If you fire a bullet we will send a battalion of Marines.
If you throw a rock, you will catch a bullet.
When we have killed all terrorists and thier leaders, and no more rocks are thrown, we will leave.
Civilians who do not engage in these activities will not be targetted.
YOU WILL SUBMIT OR DIE !
I would kick them out with only the clothes on their backs, and eradicate their properties to the ground, and no further direct communication with their governments until after the completion of the investigation and whatever response we take. Either the US stands firm now, and proves that any future terroristic actions will be met with overwhelming response, or we join the rest of the failed republics and democracies that allowed their enemies free reign inside their walls of security.
1) The list of terrorist states is rather long.
2) Cutting off communications also has the effect of minimizing the pro-American elements in the country.
3) We need international cooperation to make isolation effective. It takes an attack like this to get it.
4) The American people would not have had the resolve to take the necessary follow up actions (war) without these attacks.
There is a VERY BIG silver lining to this. Attacking us like this has awakened a sleeping giant and galvanized the world. It was a very stupid thing to do, like walking up to Mike Tyson and punching him. Sometimes I think either ben Laden or Saddam Hussein was just getting very tired with his life and wanted us to end it.
That is strong language implying that we will be invading and occupying these countries. He also implied that we must destroy the social fabric that supports the terrorists. Killing the terrorists themselves now appears to be a minor goal.
BUMP
Those are not the cool reasoned words we need of a leader.
Wrong. According to the US State Department, there are less than a dozen listed foreign governments as supporters/harborers of terrorists.
2) Cutting off communications also has the effect of minimizing the pro-American elements in the country.
Wrong. Cutting off direct diplomatic communication also cuts their access to our halls of power and shuts down their diplomatic immunity for anything they can do to undermine our activities. Recall the guy from Georgia who killed by driving drunk in DC? It took several weeks of negotiation and the assistance of their Prime Minister to revoke the diplomatic status to allow his arrest and charge. Without the acquiescence of the foreign government, diplomatic immunity is, and should remain, an absolute shield. However, it was never meant to shield murderers and terrorists of any type.
3) We need international cooperation to make isolation effective. It takes an attack like this to get it.
We will get cooperation from our friends and those who would be our friends. We will never get it from the likes of Assad, Hussein; Arafat, Kadafhy, et al. Even Russia and Chine have agreed that they will support our actions, for they are well aware that they are in as much danger from these types of activities as the US; maybe not to the extent, but to the point of mass destabilization of their regimes.
4) The American people would not have had the resolve to take the necessary follow up actions (war) without these attacks.
If our leadership -- all of it -- takes a reasoned and decisive action based on firm proven knowledge, the majority will support that action. TR had a great saying, "Speak softly, but carry a big stick." The US has the biggest stick on the planet. If we fail to use it, then more attacks, probably biological and chemical -- popssibly even tactical 'suitcase' nukes -- become more of a reality than not.
Let me be clear. I do not advocate starting a third World War. I do advocate we must finish it should it start.
Um, Cletus, they'll think we're offering aid...
Unfortunately, that is the only response we've seen from our so called leaders.
We are fighting a war with an enemy which respects and fears only immediate decisive and unequivocal response.
This is not rocket science.
Just because we haven't seen more, doesn't mean that it isn't happening. And for the sake of our success, that's the way it should be.
The WTC wake-up call is a light tap, while being the single most devastating strike against Americans in our history. Eventually, unless we get very lucky in our timing and are absolutely thorough in this enterprise, terrorists will be first to use biological and nuclear warfare in the 21st century.
Well said!
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.