[rescue] God bless America

[Mike Meredith]

On Thursday 13 September 2001 22:17, you wrote:
> > We've been fighting back against terrorism in the conventional
> > sense for a long time. Terrorism is still in use today.
>
> Perhaps you misunderstood me, I am not advocating the measures used
> in the past, which obviously have not eradicated Terrorism.  You cite
> that " Attempting to defeat them militarily just didn't work. "  I

Actually I wrote it, and didn't cite it (just in case anyone thinks I'm 
quoting someone).

> say that there has _never_ been any such attempt.  Militarily
> defeating them would be defeating them in the way that the Third
> Reich was defeated in 1945. 

'Defeating them militarily' means using the military to defeat them. 
And doesn't mean any particular tactic --- I'm not qualified to advise 
the military, and seeing as your advising the use of tactics that work 
against a large army that can't hide against a number of small groups 
of terrorists who can and do hide, I suggest you are not qualified 
either.

> Obviously this kind of force has not been
> used in recent years (or have you Brits been keeping it a secret from

The British, the Israelis, and the Spanish (and a number of other 
governments around the world) have considerably more experience 
combating terrorism than the US. I dare say the British Army would have 
been delighted to fight the IRA in open warfare, but they never had the 
chance. The IRA hid amonst the civilian population; some of which 
supported the IRA; most of which resented the British Army being there.

Fortunately, the British Army did not regularly descend into the kind 
of action that would bring about the deaths of relatively innocent 
civilians, or the 6 counties would not now be on the verge of peace and 
peace would not be achievable for at least another generation.

> > Assuming that terrorists are not rational is a rather dangerous
> > assumption to make. Maybe the suicidal ones aren't rational,
>
> This is the point, comission/planning/assistance of this kind of act
> will be the same thing as suicide, not only for the terrorist, but
> for the whole organization.

Destroying these organisations is very difficult, as anyone who has 
tried has found out. They know that people are out to destroy them, and 
take action to ensure that it is very difficult. The leader of a 
cell-based terrorist organisation won't know how many members he has, 
where they are located, how much money is available, or where the arms 
dumps are.

> This is why we must work harder at killing them earlier.
> It may seem harsh, but I would rather that we kill 500 terrorists a
> year than see them kill 10,000 americans in one day.

If I believed that would work, I would reluctantly (I have pacifist 
leanings) support such action.

Unfortunately, I'm thoroughly convinced that the kind of action the US 
(and unless it's excessively excessive, the other members of NATO as 
well) is likely to make, will make things considerably worse. It will 
drive those who already hate the US (rightly or wrongly, it doesn't 
matter) into the terrorists recruitment offices in unprecedented 
numbers.