[ingeborg]

Pipes is correct here--but we are at war. Suppressing the enemy's ability to score points in the media and damage the economy--as much as blowing up a bridge in the romantic warfare of the pass--with an fear-response from the masses has to be achieved by the good guys. We completely screw the bad guys up when we blur their message.

[browardchad]

Suppressing the enemy's ability to score points in the media and damage the economy--as much as blowing up a bridge in the romantic warfare of the pass--with an fear-response from the masses has to be achieved by the good guys. We completely screw the bad guys up when we blur their message

That was exactly the rationale behind the Clinton administration's minimizing of attacks as "isolated incidents." The result? 9/11.

How many human lives are we willing to sacrifice in "suppressing the enemy's ability to score points?"

[FReepaholic]

>>...Suppressing the enemy's ability to score points in the media and damage the economy...<<

Interesting point.

[Freedom'sWorthIt]

"Pipes is correct here--but we are at war. Suppressing the enemy's ability to score points in the media and damage the economy--as much as blowing up a bridge in the romantic warfare of the pass--with an fear-response from the masses has to be achieved by the good guys. We completely screw the bad guys up when we blur their message."

I wish more understood this.

The emphasis should be on the fact that we are IN A WAR - a real war.

Which means we are trying to kill them and they are trying to kill us.

I just wish in addition to playing down whatever the terrorists are doing for the purposes you explain well above - we would hear more about how we are succeeding in killing them. THAT is just as important as the above.