Posted on 10/05/2001 8:39:29 AM PDT by Brian_Baldwin
We are told that there will be surgical strikes and special forces or commando raids of target bunkers of the bin Laden caves and camps in Afghanistan, which will cause decisive and "massive" elimination of bin Laden's "foot soldiers", and that the "people" of Afghanistan are not the target, that even the Taliban which was a target is perhaps not a target, that the bridges and factories of Afghanistan will be avoided because the Afghani "people" are not the target. That's funny, but, didn't we specifically target the bridges and factories, and for that matter people, of Yugoslavia, in order to pressure the Serbians to overthrow their own government? Didn't we bomb the bridges and factories of Yugoslavia into the stone-age to help our wonderful Muslim friends, the so-called ethnic Albanians? Ethnic Albanians, the same Muslims, are now causing terrorism and spreading Islamic extremist cells into Macedonia, into Russia, and you may choose to not believe it but into Greece as well. . . . who are now immigrating international Islamist movements, Jamaat-i-Islami's, right into the under belly of Europe. The Jamaat-i-Islami's which are actually more political cult movements rather than religious cult movements, even though their thugs and supporters are indeed religious homicidal maniacs. These wonderful Muslim Kosovars, whom the US and NATO helped by bombing the bridges, the factories, and innocent people of Serbia into the stone-age, these are the same Muslim Kosovars, the so-called ethnic Albanians, who deal in Afghani heroin. If these same Muslim Kosovars, these same ethnic Albanians, if these same Muslims deal in Afghani heroin, why would they not deal in Afghani terrorism? Bush gave a stirring and historical speech, his best delivery that he ever gave to the American people, about how the rest of the world will have to choose, that those who are not with us are with "them", the terrorists, about how those who harbor terrorists are going to be held accountable, about how this is a war on terrorism. It was a wonderful speech. And, it seems the war on terrorism has been better defined for us since then, by Powell and others in the Bush Administration. The war on terrorism is a war on four specific bunkers in a remote part of Afghanistan, bunker 13, bunker sand flea 9, bunker bin, and bunker jihad. So, maybe the war on terrorism should be renamed the war on bunker 13. Bush's speech was great, historical, and really built up a lot of expectations. And it would really be an outrage, in fact, volcanic in political consequences, if he built up all these expectations, and, you know, bunker 13 goes up an smoke and America is told that everyone is now suppose to go back to sleep because the "war on terrorism" is a "long-term" slower than a snail operation where for the most part, things are happening behind the scenes, but for strategic reasons, no one is going to be told what, and now and then another bunker may blow up or something, but just watch Wheel of Fortune and forget about this war on terrorism which isn't important to think about and is basically, since it goes on forever, also over as far as a real war, you know what I mean. Those who are not with us on this war, they are with "them" and against us. And what this means is, you can be "neutral", but you are still "with us". For example, you can have all your people out on the street screaming death to Americans and dancing whenever another terrorist attack kills thousands of Americans, and your Muslim government can declare "neutrality", and maybe you can use an airstrip "only for humanitarian aid" to Muslims, and, then, you are "with us". That is also defined as "with us", and is part of the rules in the war on terrorism. In the war on terrorism, it is a war on bunker 13, so if you harbor terrorists, well, that is probably ok, don't worry, you are not the target, certainly you have no concern of being held accountable by the US. You are in fact "with us" just so long as you don't get in the way if we send commandos into bunker 13. And, even if you do kind of "get in the way", and condemn us, and all that, if and when we send commandos into bunker 13, and, you know, even if you harbor a couple terrorists, well, don't worry about it. It's like Indonesia or Pakistan or others, or China for example. Since we defined the rules as those who aren't with us on this war on terrorism are with "them", well, even if you do all those things, like declare yourself neutral, get in the way of our operations, condemn us, march in the street shouting death to Americans, declare that the war on terrorism now to be limited only to a "Food (for Muslims) not Bombs" operation "or else", and harbor terrorists and all that, you are still with "us" because otherwise if we said you are with "them", we might have to do something about it which we are not going to do because it might upset the coaltion. Understand? The whole idea of this war on terrorism is to avoid the same mistakes of the past. Don't rush into anything, get your intelligence together first, and then, maybe if you hit bunker 13, that's good enough. But in order to determine if it was good enough or not, you take a year to study if it was good enough before you hit the bunker, and then another year to study if it was good enough in it's effect after you hit the bunker. You don't repeat mistakes in the past, like when we gave millions of dollars in aid to bin Laden and the Taliban . . . this time you give millions of dollars of aid to Pakistan so that you can strike bin Laden and avoid the mistake of having created him since you now have killed him by giving millions of dollars to Pakistan. You don't repeat the mistakes in the past, like leaving the terrorist government of Saddam in power in Iraq. This time, you listen to the same guy, Powell, who didn't want to remove the terrorist government of Saddam from power because you might upset the "coalition", and what you do is you let Afghanistan have any government it wants, even if it is the same terrorist Taliban government or whatever name it wants to call itself this week under a new beard, declare the Taliban is "toast", but just make sure you don't upset the "coalition" like you almost did last time. That was the mistake in the past - you almost upset the coalition, and we don't want to repeat the same mistakes. The real key to power isn't removing those who harbor terrorists. The real key to power is the coalition. That is the real benefit of being constant victims to terrorist attacks - it strengthens the coalition. And, it allows you to feed a lot of Muslims food. For example, there are some who want instant retaliation. These people are stupid. These are the same stupid people who will repeat the same mistakes of the past. And this time, we won't do that. So, our first act should not be instant retaliation. Our first act should be to give them food. You know, the bumper sticker that says "Food Not Bombs"? You see that bumper sticker a lot in Berkeley, California. It is usually on a Volvo driven by a liberal leftist who hates America and wants to put all of us into socialist cages. Well, it turns out they have the right idea. And so, the first act of the Bush Administration in this war on terrorism is food not bombs. Instead of dropping bombs, we are going to drop food. Food Not Bombs. You risk airmen and crew their lives, but it is a humanitarian act in this police action. The war on terrorism is about what was an act of war, September 11, - strike that: it isn't an "act of war" anymore, it is the "incident" of September 11. It is now not an act of war because no one, no one, is calling it that now - they call it a tragedy, a crime. And being that it is a crime, you can call the police or something, but it's not about a military action but a police action. And, the first Americans to die should, naturally, die for food not bombs. We have to redefine what American society stands for, like Bush says. It's not about infinite justice. But, it's about being told about infinite waiting. Because, this is a long war, and anyone who isn't with us on this war, is with "them", but understand, what that means is that we are not talking about nations here. Governments and nations don't have to be with "us", they can be neutral, or even against us, they are still somehow with us. In fact, if they are more "neutral" than "with us", the likelihood that we will given them a lot of money is even greater. What we are talking about is Americans - whoever isn't with Bush on whatever he does or doesn't do, then they are with "them". The rules apply only to Americans and not nations or terrorists or those other cultures and nations who harbor terrorists or dance in the street when American children are blown to bits, and all that. Bin Laden will be on television very soon. He isn't dead yet. America is the world's only and last super-power. Never mind China is now saying that the lack of response from the United States clearly revels that America is no longer a super-power, no longer a supersize coke but a regular coke. But there is nothing wrong with being regular. Everything is equal in the end. In fact, Rome was sacked many, many times before it actually fell. This is only the modern equivalent of the first sack of America by the barbarians, and if this isn't really a war on terrorism than we can all wait as the others soon come.Bush Administration first agendum in the war on terrorism: FOOD NOT BOMBS
No we bombed their factories and electric water works using the logic of collective punishment, of terrorism. The administration explicitly said to milosovic: "if he wants his people to have electricity and water, he'll cave in to our demands"
Israel will not be Czechoslovakia, because Israel fights terrorism, and has been fighting terrorism, and will continue to fight terrorism even if the Bush administration does not want them to fight terrorism simply because the Bush administration tries to appease the Arabs at the expense of Israel. But the very fact that some of saying this, is a sure sign that something isn't being done right, something is really wrong. Of course, the immediate response from the Powell Administration is that no one is to say it. In fact, those who aren't "with Bush" are "against him", and this is now the guideline in the "war" on terrorism - in fact, you must show your support for Bush, not only by not asking any questions, but also by not even giving any statements in support such as "I support the President's policy regarding yadda" . . . because you may find the administration says "don't say the President's policy is yadda, because even if we said yadda, we didn't mean yadda, or maybe we say madda instead of yadda, so the only thing you should do to show your support for the President is don't say yadda, but say nothing, just hang a portrait of Bush and talk about what a nice dress Laura is wearing . . . the only thing you are allow to do is do nothing, say nothing, go to a movie . . . show your support for the President by going to a movie".
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.