Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

This article was published as a full-page advertisement in the Washington Post on September 20, 2001.
1 posted on 09/23/2001 3:05:40 PM PDT by snopercod
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies ]


To: all
Is honest discussion of our situation still allowed in America, or is that considered being "against us"?
2 posted on 09/23/2001 3:08:53 PM PDT by snopercod
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: snopercod
I think you have just won my Post of the Day award!

Thank you very much!

5 posted on 09/23/2001 3:24:37 PM PDT by lodwick (Let's Roll!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: snopercod
The rules of war make it a crime to target a military leader for death.

bin laden was certain that we would declare war. If we did and we then tried to kill him, we would be guilty of war crimes. Then our Arab friends in the UN could file charges against Bush. Bush could be tried by the Arabs, just as easily as we are trying Milosevic. He would be guilty of war crimes if he tried to take bin laden out.

No one in our senate and only one in our house, hates America enough to put our leader into the category of war criminal for trying to kill bin Laden. Many of you may have seen where Aghanistan appointed bin Laden their military commander. They did it just days before the attack on us. That way if we declared war, killing bin laden would have been a war crime.

Instead we treat him as a criminal. As an international criminal we can kill him and his followers. It is not crime to kill an international criminal. It is a crime to kill teh military leader of another nation. Elevating bin laden to the status of statesman-commander is sickening to me. The people that believe in declaring war prove how gulible they are. It is for certain that bin Laden can out think them. Thank God Laden is not in Dubya's class.

Many of the Libertarian who want us to declare war keep posting the demand. It is silly. Bush was granted more power to fight than has ever been granted a president of the United States. Support from other nations depends on who the other nations think will win. World affairs is follow the leader. If you are strong enough they will follow you. Thiry million tons of declarations will not cause nations to follow the loser. That is very simple logic.

We have put together the coalition that can and will deny the Taliban food, amunition and support. They are in an impregnable fort. It is made from 4 mile high mountains of solid rock. It can not be bombed or flamed into submission. But like all forts it has one big problem. It has no way to produce food or amunition. When Afghanistan fought Russia we supplied them with food and weapons through Pakistan. So did many arab states. This time that and all other doors of supply are slammed shut. Less than 12 percent of Afghanistan will grow food. They have to have food or they will die. We have complete control of the food spigot.

All that remains is to drive them into their fortress mountain caves and wait until they surrender or starve to death... which ever comes first.

It will not cost us lives. It won't even cost us much money or many troops.

Bush just sent the Taliban a message "Seige ya for a long time. Don't eat all your food in one meal." The only way out of a surrounded impregnable fort is to surrender or have youre starved to death body carried out by the victors.

Bush did one other very bright thing. He held no nation accountable for what it did yesterday. All nations will be held accountable for what they do today and all tomorrows.

That means we don't have to fight them if they become good bosy. Now they must become our enemy one nation at a time.

It is mob psychology in reverse. If we had taken on them all they all would have had fought us together. They would have figured that they could do a NAM on us by acting together.

But by declaring them all good guys and by Bush saying will the first guy who wants to be a bad guy do so, so I can kill you, changes the game. None of them want to be the first guy killed. They figure it would take 5 or 6 of them to NAM us and the first 4 of them die. They can't find any volunteers to be the first 4 guys.

That means we clean up Dodge City for very little cost. What we have is rogue states saying here's my gun sherrif, could you point me to the sasperilla?

Ayn Rand was brilliant. The institute things in theory. Bush thinks in practice.

7 posted on 09/23/2001 4:07:26 PM PDT by Common Tator
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: snopercod
I can only read so much "Objectivist" bullsh*t.

While I'm sympathetic to the fact that they aseem to be trying to be on the right side, they do it so sneeringly and condescendingly.

Yuk.

9 posted on 09/23/2001 4:29:55 PM PDT by Illbay
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: snopercod;OWK;fod;Storm Orphan
In case you haven't seen this. It's a good read.
13 posted on 09/23/2001 5:15:56 PM PDT by Le-Roy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: snopercod
>>Conservatives are equally responsible for today's crisis, as Reagan's record attests. Reagan not only failed to retaliate after 241 U.S. marines were slaughtered in Lebanon; he did worse. Holding that Islamic guerrillas were our ideological allies because of their fight against the atheistic Soviets, he methodically poured money and expertise into Afghanistan. This put the U.S. wholesale into the business of creating terrorists. Most of them regarded fighting the Soviets as only the beginning; our turn soon came.

I stopped reading after the above.

Afghanistan wasn't linked to Beirut. Where's Libya?

14 posted on 09/23/2001 5:37:19 PM PDT by The Raven
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: snopercod
Bump
15 posted on 09/23/2001 5:39:58 PM PDT by FReethesheeples
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: snopercod
bump
19 posted on 09/23/2001 8:50:50 PM PDT by Free the USA
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: snopercod
If one were under a Nazi aerial bombardment, it would be senseless to restrict one's defensive efforts to Nazi satellites while ignoring Germany and the ideological plague it is working to spread. What Germany was to Nazism in the 1940s, Iran is to terrorism today. Whatever other countries it strikes, therefore, the U.S. can put an end to the Jihad-mongers only by taking out Iran.

I posted this today...checked to see if I was duplicating a post and nothing came up. I searched the title exactly as it's written. Anyhow... I think the paragraph above is so clearly stated and the logic is so apparent that anyone with a brain would agree.

27 posted on 09/24/2001 7:22:15 PM PDT by pgkdan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson