HP3000-L Archives

February 2003, Week 2

HP3000-L@RAVEN.UTC.EDU

Options: Use Monospaced Font
Show Text Part by Default
Show All Mail Headers

Message: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Topic: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Author: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]

Print Reply
Subject:
From:
fred White <[log in to unmask]>
Reply To:
fred White <[log in to unmask]>
Date:
Tue, 11 Feb 2003 17:47:51 -0700
Content-Type:
text/plain
Parts/Attachments:
text/plain (53 lines)
On Tuesday, February 11, 2003, at 03:05 PM, joe andress wrote:

> Fred White writes:
>
>> A cute, but too simplistic answer. The terrorists are extremists
>> within
>> alarger community (the majority of which are not extremists) many of
>> whom see the US as treating them unfairly relative to our treatment of
>> others. They see us do nothing to Israel after their invasion of
>> Lebanon. They see us invoke severe sanctions against Iraq after their
>> invasion of Kuwait.
>
> They hate the US so much that they are seeking entry in large numbers.
> They must love their own country so much that they leave it.

They don't hate the US just like we don't hate the Iraqis. We hate
their leaders and their military.
They hate our Military and Global business practices. They attacked the
Pentagon and the Twin Towers to show where their hate is directed. They
also hate our National government just as many people hate the Iraqi
government. We think we have reason to. So do they.

>> If you recall our own revolution, the British red coats marched along
>> in military formation while we resorted to ungentlemanly (terrorist)
>> tactics such as ambush. We didn't  possess a trained military with
>> comparable weaponry so were forced to adopt a strategy which seemed to
>> have the best chance of success. That's what today's terrorists have
>> been forced to do.
>
> Based upon my history, the U S army started out as a rag tag group of
> people. However, at Yorktown, the U S army was a well trained military
> force for its time. The use of trees and ambush was just an evolution
> of military tatics.
>
> I hardly think that the direct killing of civilians is an evolution of
> military tatics.

Why not. Haven't you heard of Hiroshima & Nagasaki??

Or the US using the military to kill and/or capture native Americans so
we could take their land from them. I'm not bringing this up as a guilt
trip. Just a reminder of late history. Also, somewhat earlier, the
Spanish wiped out natives of Mexico and South America with government
and religious approval.

In both of these instances, civilians were killed by soldiers. The
direct killing of civilians has been a military tactic for centuries.

FW

* To join/leave the list, search archives, change list settings, *
* etc., please visit http://raven.utc.edu/archives/hp3000-l.html *

ATOM RSS1 RSS2