the brain of Roger--not so dumb after all

[Jon Ford]

Roger-- I agree that the US Government is terrorist, as are various 
movements for "freedom" around the world, now and in earlier phases of 
history. Terrorism is inseparable from modern war, so if the US declares war 
on the world (or on what it calls "terrorism," which is a world-wide 
phenomenon), it is likely to do so with some global terrorist strategies 
which will include even attacking itself through "heightened security" 
suspending our civil liberties. In full-scale war,anything and everything 
goes, and many good things get tossed aside, including "civilized" values!

I guess the real question is--it is a good idea to declare war on the world? 
Many would say no; the deluded ones (like Mike) refuse to see that that is 
what we have done, and try to exert some psychic damage control--ie., "It's 
just 1000 perverted , fire-breathing Arabs we have to kill-- nothing to it, 
and then everything will be alright." Sounds like a line from a pop-song-- 
and every bit as inane.

Jon

>
>So Mike makes it quite clear where he stands. Kill 1000 Arabs living
>in Afghanistan, never mind the side effects implications for the millions
>of Afghan innocents on the verge of starvation there and the messy details
>and where that is all likely to lead in terms of Arab and islamic opinion.
>Kill, kill, kill!
>
>
>Lets call that Exhibit A.
>
>(Here's a good followup link: http://www.gopteamleader.com/ )
>
>
>             *********************************************
>
>On to exhibit B -- Roger Baker's brain-droppings. I'll cite what I think is 
>a
>legitimate and thoughtful point of view from:
>
>http://www.zmag.org/ZNETTOPnoanimation.html
>
>
>The issue at hand is whether the US is terrorist and on what relative 
>scale. Mike
>apparently defines terrorism so as to automatically exclude the USA.
>
>For the more thoughtful, however, it is difficult to come up with a logical
>definition of terrorism that does not include the US government for the 
>following
>reasons:
>
>
>"...Is the U.S. government terrorist?
>
>When the U.S. government targets civilians with the intention of pressuring 
>their
>governments, yes, it is engaging in terrorism. Regrettably, this is not 
>uncommon
>in our history. Most recently, imposing a food and drug embargo on a 
>country - Iraq -
>with the intention of making conditions so difficult for the population 
>that they
>will rebel against their government, is terrorism (with food and medicine 
>as the
>weapons, not bombs). Bombing civilian centers and the society's public 
>infrastructure
>in Kosovo and Serbia, again with the intent of coercing political outcomes, 
>was
>terrorism. And now, attacking Afghanistan (one of the world's poorest 
>countries) and
>hugely aggravating starvation dangers for its population with the possible 
>loss of
>tens of thousands, or more lives, is terrorism. We are attacking civilians 
>with the
>aim of attaining political goals unrelated to them - in this case hounding 
>bin Laden
>and toppling the Taliban..."
>
>                 *

_________________________________________________________________
Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp