Reto Roth wrote:
> 
> Hannah Kincaid schrieb:
> 
> > But I do believe that a strong, precise military action against the
> > perpetrators -- the _right_ perpetrators,
> 
> "Strong", precise military actions are an urban legend!
> 
> 9 years military experience told me that there´s nothing like that!

Roth is correct, Hannah.  There is no such thing.  If the U.S. goes
to war against Afghanistan (or, possibly, Iraq), our soldiers will
be killed, and innocent people will die, as they did in the U.S.
bombing of Tripoli and Bengazi, Libya, in 1986 (see my comment to
John Urie in "OT: What We Should NOT Do").  And that's just one of
the lesser examples.

Michael Moore has just published an excellent commentary on the
situation ( http://www.michaelmoore.com/2001_0912.html ), in which
he points out that Osama Bin Laden is a monster of our own creation.
He went to terrorist school courtesy of the CIA, an even bigger gang
of monsters responsible for coups, assassinations, and other acts of
"low-intensity warfare."  And once Bin Laden and his buddies drove
the Soviets out of Afghanistan, he decided to use what he learned
against us (chew on that one a while, Hirtes).

Despite all that, Bin Laden is one of our lesser monsters.  Our
government funded terrorists in Central America who killed tens
of thousands.  We supported murderous dictators whose carnage makes
Osama's brutality look amateurish by comparison.  Our country
murdered over 1 million in Vietnam.  And we're preparing to orphan
even more children -- kids who'll likely grow up with nothing but
vengence in their hearts against the people of this nation.

The fact that this war hysteria is being led by an incompetant,
election-stealing fraud like George W. Bush is particularly
horrifying.  Horrifying, but not too suprising, since his old man
was responsible for much of the bloodshed in Central America, and
was former head of the CIA -- the aforementioned criminal
organization that helped create nightmares like Bin Laden.

So you'll excuse me, Hannah, if I reject the notion that war is
sometimes "necessary" -- no *real* leftist I know would ever
accept that.  War may be unavoidable, as it was in World War 2,
but it is never "necessary."  War is necessary only to those in
power.  And war is possible only when you can coerce or force
(e.g., through Selective Service) enough of the powerless to
fight it for you.  To quote Leon Trostky, "A bayonet is a
weapon with a worker on both ends."

-- 

And I hope that you die, And your death'll come soon
I will follow your casket, In the pale afternoon
And I'll watch while you're lowered, Down to your deathbed
And I'll stand o'er your grave, 'Til I'm sure that you're dead

My ode to Ronald Reagan,
borrowed from Bob Dylan's "Masters of War"