Yes, the fact that NATO invoked Article V, the 'all for one' article is a major step. This is the first time that it has ever been used. This is the type of collective action that I was referring to last night. It's a global reaction that's needed, not a solitary one.
We're not the ones who deserve thanks. We have done nothing. Thank the men & women risking their lives.
Is my train in vain, has my soul gone to waste
Am I just a victim of, a victim of my lost faith
This message was edited by Froy on 9-12-01 @ 9:31 PM
IkeaBoy P.L.F.
Portugese Liberation Front- Liberating Status' everywhere from the Tyranny of Portugal
I will die a traitor's death
posted on 09-12-2001 @ 9:28 PM
O&A Board Veteran Registered: Sep. 00
Does anyone think Osama is nervous?
DoughBoy
posted on 09-12-2001 @ 9:34 PM
O&A Board Regular Registered: Oct. 00
Nervous.. no! I've posted this in another thread, or something to this effect, but now I have the quote...
quote: "I'm fighting so I can die a martyr and go to heaven to meet God. Our fight now is against the Americans," bin Laden was once quoted by Al-Quds Al-Arabi as saying.
He's happy as a pig in shit. For him it is a win-win situation. If he dies, he goes to the right hand of Allah with his virgins, milk, and honey. If he stays alive, he works for Allah by killing more Americans.
There are no american CIVILIANS to him. Nobody is innocent. We're all AMERICANS. We're ALL the ENEMY!
Arthur Dent
posted on 09-12-2001 @ 9:42 PM
O&A Board Regular Registered: Nov. 00
I wonder about that DoughBoy.
The terrorists are a LOT like a giant, violent CULT.
Just as the Branch Davidians were a perversion of Christianity, what the terrorists beleive is a perversion of Islam.
And just as I doubt David Korresh BELIEVED the crap he taught, I doubt Bin Ladin BELIEVES the crap he spews.
They use peoples beliefs to gain POWER. In the end, that is their goal. To gain power over as many people as possible. They tell the lonely, angry, or otherwise emotionally vulnerable people what they want to hear and mold them into followers who will do anything for their "messiah". The message is just a tool to gain power. They'd preach that Tella-Tubbies are messengers of God of it would gain them enough followers.
[IMG SRC="http://www.subdimension.com/cgi-bin/anonymizit/nph-proxy.cgi/http/groups.yahoo.com/group/OAComSigPics/files/Arthur%20Dent%27s%20Sig/ladies.GIF"]
"When I was born I was so surprised I couldn't talk for a year and a half." - Gracie Allen
A much wittier reply came to mind immediately after I clicked the 'Send' button.
DannyNoonan
posted on 09-12-2001 @ 9:54 PM
Psychopath Registered: Apr. 01
Yes, Froy, you're right, but, not entirely. Thanks, anyway.
Well, lets look at a subject I in which I minored in college...GEOGRAPHY. Unfortunately, Afghanistan is land-locked (loads of political shit here). That's why that comment from douchebag [insert senator here] about Pakistan is so important. A beach landing into friendly Pakistan could make this whole thing easier...not that it will be easy. The Russians showed us that, but I think we learned a lot before and since then. Don't you think?
Is it true Osama is under "house-arrest"?
Yes, I've turned to the internet instead of the fucking tv.
Sarcastro
posted on 09-12-2001 @ 10:38 PM
Psychopath Registered: Nov. 00
First off, to respond to Froy and others saying that if we nuke them, that will only inspire them to get a nuke and nuke us, let me ask you guys a question. Do you really think that if we DONT nuke them, and Bin Ladin or some other terrorist gets his hands on a nuke, and finds a way to smuggle it into the US, that they wont use it on us ANYWAY? They hate us. It is a Holy War for them. They will use whatever weapons are at their disposal to try to hurt us. Nuclear, biological, it makes no difference to them. So, if they get a nuke, they're using it, whether we use one on them or not.
As to other nations responding to our possibly nuking Afghanistan, which nations? England? Nope. North Korea? Why would they care? Pakistan? Your best bet for a reprisal, but would they risk it? Doubtful. Russia? They are our allies in this, and I dont think they have much love loss for Afghanistan. And, of course, since all these nations(aside from Russia) doesnt have the capability to launch nukes from subs(I dont think they HAVE subs) its highly dobutful a ground based launch would make it to the US before being at least intercepted. So the idea of a large scale nuclear war is HIGHLY unlikely even if the US were to deploy one here.
All that being said, its not worth using nukes. Because in the final analysis, we lose. No matter what we do. Short of genocide, we lose. Because they will ALWAYS be another generation of terrorists. ALWAYS. And taking away their supply lines wont kill them. And killing their leaders wont kill them. They will simply disappear for awhile. Or at least disappear "officiallly", going so far underground we will never dig them out. The President said we are at "war", and like Vietnam, its a war we can never win, because we are fighting an ideology. And you cant kill an ideology.
The best thing the President can do is a limited action, minimal bombing at best, and secure Bin Ladin for trial. Other than that, there aint much that can be done.
This message was edited by Sarcastro on 9-12-01 @ 10:55 PM
King Shit
*board owner*
posted on 09-12-2001 @ 11:03 PM
O&A Board Veteran Registered: Feb. 01
My worry was less in the thought of nuclear retaliation, but that nuclear counter-terrorism will become a common practice. Once we go to a nuclear level, everything changes, on a human level, a political level, a scientific/ecological level, whether you are using a low-yield nuke or an ICBM loaded with mulitple thermo-nuclear warheads. The fact that we would respond is such a way and truly change the way in which the world operates is much more frightening to me than the continuation of terrorist attacks.
Is my train in vain, has my soul gone to waste
Am I just a victim of, a victim of my lost faith
Sarcastro
posted on 09-12-2001 @ 11:09 PM
Psychopath Registered: Nov. 00
We are very close to that point now, Froy, with the proliferation of nuclear weapons to various powers throughout the world. But, point taken, its probably not a precedent the US should set. My main objection to nuclear weapons is its pointless. Unless we commit to wiping out whole races, its pointless. The "message" that we think we'd be sending would not get through, at all. Nothing we do will get through to those people. Maybe in a few hundred years they'll stop hating us, or hey, our nation could collapse and our world power status could go away. But that's probably not something to shoot for.
DannyNoonan
posted on 09-12-2001 @ 11:12 PM
Psychopath Registered: Apr. 01
The best thing the President can do is a limited action, minimal bombing at best, and secure Bin Ladin for trial. Other than that, there aint much that can be done.
Does this bring the thread an answer?
Yes, it may involve our ground finest just to get this guy. I believe it's worth it.
Will this solve the problem in the long run? No.
Only we, US citizens can do that. I guess we'll have Israeli advisors now...
2 tired 2 give N F One of the Teen Tomatoe Boys is Retarted... Guess which one I am!!!
posted on 09-12-2001 @ 11:26 PM
Psychopath Registered: Jan. 01
quote: Only we, US citizens can do that. I guess we'll have Israeli advisors now...