Photo: an Afghani boy

It is indeed a tragedy that innocent young Afghan children like this will suffer for the sins of their elders. But America (my country!) and the world should not use the presence of such innocents as an excuse to allow the Taliban regime to continue in power in Afghanistan.

One of the other posters suggested buying "butter, not guns". We (the rest of the world) have tried doing that. The Taliban have placed severe restrictions on the work of international aid workers. They arrested one young American woman for the dastardly crime of bringing a BIBLE into the country. Other aid workers have been arrested on other pretexts, and food has been confiscated by government authorities for their own use.

Moreover, the young child pictured might be in better condition if his mother were allowed to leave the house rather than be kept as a virtual slave locked away from public view. Perhaps he is orphaned because his father was executed for the crime of cutting his beard or getting a western-style haircut.

The Taliban regime's quest for ideological purity is killing their country as effectively as any cruise missle could. Frankly, I think that this child would be better off in the long run if America invaded Afghanistan and set up a military governorship to help it make the transition into a modern, civilized, educated nation.

For those who believe America is war-mongering, bent only on destruction, I would remind you of our treatment of Germany and Japan after World War II. Our country understood our moral obligation to help those that we hurt so brutally once our need for self-defense had past. Rather than exacting tribute or turning it into an American colony, we assisted them in their industrial rebuilding and took over the entire task of providing for its military defense. To this day, Japan has no standing army. It doesn't pay us to defend it, we do it because it is in our mutual best interests to do so.

Patrick Martin

P.S. Please note my use of the phrase "ideological purity" in describing the Taliban's mania. They cite religion for support of their fanatacism, but I haven't seen a single reputable scholar of the Qu'ran support their extremist interpretations.
http://www.dpnet.com.cn/forum/images/ {B5446200-AA78-11D5-A9A3-000629D58109}.jpg
 
I have no personal idea what it might cost to buy a Castle + large estate give the castle + about 30 acres away, construct a magnificent home on the Castle's grounds with helicopter landing pad and surround the lot with immense high wall and gates - my guess is a lot. The folks who did this own a company that does the wiring in Sadam Hussein' palaces I have no idea how many needy children this kind of money would help - I imagine a lot; again this was what the electrical contractors got - imagine the plumbers...

I'm not intending to trivialize an awful situation however I think the plight of Iraqi children would certainly be eased were money not spent in this - and I have no doubt similar other ways.

Michael
 
It is a waste of time to respond to such a posting but i am already doing it.

Fortunately your government is more wise than obviously you are.

A senseless act of revengejust would be the beginning of something worse...

A.P.
 
It is a waste of time to respond to such a posting but i am already
doing it.

Fortunately your government is more wise than obviously you are.

A senseless act of revengejust would be the beginning of something
worse...

A.P.
Kyle,

I think it's important to not let passions and feelings over ride logic and reason. That's how the liberals decision-make!

That little boy may regard the Taliban as an enemy, and, if we can win him over by fighting in support of the Northern tribes (Afghan's equivalent to Montegnards in Viet Nam?), we might not have to go back in five or ten years. Maybe the anti-Taliban rebels aren't going to be much better than the Taliban, but they can't be much worse.

All life has value. Weighing the degree of civilian casualties deemed acceptable should be a military decision, not a visceral one, one way or the other.

I sympathize with your sense of outrage. But I think it important to keep it focused.
FJBrad
 
http://www.dpnet.com.cn/forum/images/ B5446200-AA78-11D5-A9A3-000629D58109}.jpg;
Bomb Afghanistan until they are no longer on the map. Take that
little boy with them. Any bleeding heart liberal that wants to go
stand next to him can get blown up too!
Is the satire at the expense of poor Mr Rush Limbaugh or whatever he's called?

Even further off topic, how many Americans wouldn't die were gun related death to stop for a year? I think it maybe a grisly statistic that gun crimes kill more annually than the WTC outrage - though of course it's not quite as good television and happens at different times in different places during the course of a year.

Michael
 
One problem with this warm fuzzy approach is that while it may sound righteous and make us feel good, many of these people don't want our help because they look at our entire society as evil and corrupt. They'll take our food to keep from starving, but they won't trust us. For goodness sakes, look at the relief workers over there who were imprisoned and are under an impending sentence of death for simply talking about their belief in Jesus Christ. Do you really think passing out cookies will solve this problem? Their children are taught from birth to be intolerant of anything that doesn't come from taliban-approved sources. To them, terrorists are freedom fighters and heroes, not murderers. It is so very, very sad that it is the children in such situations who suffer the most, and nobody wishes harm to any of them. But you also have to stop and ask if the terrorists paused to look at photographs of American children that they would soon be killing and depriving of parents. Maybe they should have passed out cookies on the streets of New York to make their point instead of murdering over 5,000 people? If giving bread and butter on them will truly fix this problem, then I say give them all that they want! But let's be realistic. Governments like that one resent our help because they believe that after the bread will come McDonalds and then Levi jeans and before you know it, women may even be allowed to ride in a car and refuse to have their genitals mutilated.
I think rather than using the 40billion for antiterrorism, the
spending can be more effective in eradicating terrorism if the
money is used to help develop the very poor countries. Like
someone else said, “bomb them, bomb them with bread, butter and
milk, don’t forget cookies too”.
 
Let's also not forget the cause of the sanctions. They wouldn't exist if Iraq would allow the UN to freely inspect and destroy all facilities where they are making weapons of mass destruction. The no-fly zones wouldn't exist if Iraq wasn't conducting a program of genocide of minority ethnic and Muslim groups in their own borders.
I have no personal idea what it might cost to buy a Castle + large
estate give the castle + about 30 acres away, construct a
magnificent home on the Castle's grounds with helicopter landing
pad and surround the lot with immense high wall and gates - my
guess is a lot. The folks who did this own a company that does the
wiring in Sadam Hussein' palaces I have no idea how many needy
children this kind of money would help - I imagine a lot; again
this was what the electrical contractors got - imagine the
plumbers...

I'm not intending to trivialize an awful situation however I think
the plight of Iraqi children would certainly be eased were money
not spent in this - and I have no doubt similar other ways.

Michael
 
Is the satire at the expense of poor Mr Rush Limbaugh or whatever
he's called?

Even further off topic, how many Americans wouldn't die were gun
related death to stop for a year? I think it maybe a grisly
statistic that gun crimes kill more annually than the WTC outrage -
though of course it's not quite as good television and happens at
different times in different places during the course of a year.

Michael
If just ONE person on each of those planes had had a concealed weapon, we would be talking about cameras instead of this tragedy.

None of those terrorists had guns, and yet they managed to kill a number of people even before they plowed the planes into theWTC and Pentagon.

If you are ever confronted by a thug bent on destroying your life, think of today and the sentiments you expressed here.
FJBrad
 
I have no personal idea what it might cost to buy a Castle + large
estate give the castle + about 30 acres away, construct a
magnificent home on the Castle's grounds with helicopter landing
pad and surround the lot with immense high wall and gates - my
guess is a lot. The folks who did this own a company that does the
wiring in Sadam Hussein' palaces I have no idea how many needy
children this kind of money would help - I imagine a lot; again
this was what the electrical contractors got - imagine the
plumbers...

I'm not intending to trivialize an awful situation however I think
the plight of Iraqi children would certainly be eased were money
not spent in this - and I have no doubt similar other ways.

Michael
Agree, right on. I would add that Saddam agreed to the UN inspections, then changed his mind. HE is killing and starving his children and he alone. He could stop it with a phone call. He also is quite adept at using his own countrie's women and children as human shields, as are all terrorists. No honor. Sheer cowardice.
FJBrad
 
Why would you think a weapon would have made a difference? There were only 3-5 people, each armed with a box cutter - that's about a 1inch blade. They could have been overcome with ease - problem was they claimed to have a bomb.

A commentator made a valid point last night on T.V. - we could save more lives by stopping smoking and buckling up. That's not to minimize the WTC tragedy - it's just interesting how little regard we often display for human life (including our own)

bois
Is the satire at the expense of poor Mr Rush Limbaugh or whatever
he's called?

Even further off topic, how many Americans wouldn't die were gun
related death to stop for a year? I think it maybe a grisly
statistic that gun crimes kill more annually than the WTC outrage -
though of course it's not quite as good television and happens at
different times in different places during the course of a year.

Michael
If just ONE person on each of those planes had had a concealed
weapon, we would be talking about cameras instead of this tragedy.
None of those terrorists had guns, and yet they managed to kill a
number of people even before they plowed the planes into theWTC and
Pentagon.
If you are ever confronted by a thug bent on destroying your life,
think of today and the sentiments you expressed here.
FJBrad
 
Even further off topic, how many Americans wouldn't die were gun
related death to stop for a year? I think it maybe a grisly
statistic that gun crimes kill more annually than the WTC outrage -
though of course it's not quite as good television and happens at
different times in different places during the course of a year.

Michael
Beth wrote:
Michael,

And further off topic...how about this? Using the gun lobby's logic, the answer to terrorism in the air isn't to take knives and other sharp objects from passengers, but to ARM them all with as many sharp objects as they can carry aboard. Those highjackers will not dare take another American airplane hostage when they realize that they face a united fork wielding ridership!
 
If you are ever confronted by a thug bent on destroying your life,
think of today and the sentiments you expressed here.
Amen, FJBrad -- though God forbid it should happen to them.

I say this as someone who was once virulently "anti-gun" -- for most of my life, in fact. Several awful occurrences changed my mind. Family members of mine and I have known something like 8 people who were attacked and murdered in or around their homes by criminals (most with knives or blunt instruments; one was strangled). My own father was beaten and slashed during a burglary of his house. He was lucky: he lived. Not so the others. Rest in peace.

There were two more such attacks on friends of mine. In one, the attacker tried to smash down the friend's front door. The other friend was approached by an armed man in a parking lot late at night. But neither was injured. They were able to display weapons to their attackers, one of whom ran like crazy; the other, on hearing the unmistakeable sound of a cartridge being chambered, halted in his tracks -- long enough to buy my friend time to run away to safety. In both cases: no shots fired. The display of the weapons was sufficient.

Over time understanding that so many people we'd known died while defenseless radically altered my previous feelings about weapons and, more to the point for me, about the basic human right to self-protection. But I have learned, sadly, that this point cannot be brought home to people who are aggressively "anti-gun"; they sneer at it; sometimes they think I'm making up these stories; they think it can't happen to them; they "know" the police can protect them, and so forth. The sneering (for its own sake -- the old "us versus them" game) is actually a critical -- and unadmitted -- part of the mind-set. I am intimately familiar with the mind-set and I know that almost nothing can get through to it. I know I can only relate my own experience -- and when I do so I have no expectation that I can be persuasive. If they have a change of heart, it will likely come only slowly, as happened to me...
 
Even further off topic, how many Americans wouldn't die were gun
related death to stop for a year? I think it maybe a grisly
statistic that gun crimes kill more annually than the WTC outrage -
though of course it's not quite as good television and happens at
different times in different places during the course of a year.

Michael
Beth wrote:
Michael,

And further off topic...how about this? Using the gun lobby's
logic, the answer to terrorism in the air isn't to take knives and
other sharp objects from passengers, but to ARM them all with as
many sharp objects as they can carry aboard. Those highjackers will
not dare take another American airplane hostage when they realize
that they face a united fork wielding ridership!
LOL!!! good one, this. or how about this: give everyone an assault rifle as soon as they step aboard the airplane, just to even the odds up. i doubt whether any hijacker would have the ba* s to pull any stunt.
 
remember just a few weeks ago when the biggest concern for the airlines was air-rage?
LOL!!! good one, this. or how about this: give everyone an assault
rifle as soon as they step aboard the airplane, just to even the
odds up. i doubt whether any hijacker would have the ba* s to pull
any stunt.
 
http://www.dpnet.com.cn/forum/images/ B5446200-AA78-11D5-A9A3-000629D58109}.jpg;
Bomb Afghanistan until they are no longer on the map. Take that
little boy with them. Any bleeding heart liberal that wants to go
stand next to him can get blown up too!
Is the satire at the expense of poor Mr Rush Limbaugh or whatever
he's called?

Even further off topic, how many Americans wouldn't die were gun
related death to stop for a year? I think it maybe a grisly
statistic that gun crimes kill more annually than the WTC outrage -
though of course it's not quite as good television and happens at
different times in different places during the course of a year.

Michael
point is, how many gun-wielding people can do the same damage as the hijackers did in the same amount of time? television coverage or no, the magnitude of this carnage is simply unparallaled. think of how many casualties there would be if this scene is repeated as often as drive-by shootings.
 
Years ago ... had a client, (when I did criminal defense work) who was a burgler. Asked him how he decided what house to hit. He replied, "any house that looked like no one lived there that could hurt me". The sound of a slide action shotgun, on a still night ... can be heard for quite a distance. I carry, but only because I'm a divorce lawyer, (only divorce lawyers ever get shot!!)

Ktimmerman (Karl Timmerman M.A.J.D.)
 
Kyle,

I have seen posts on this and other forums where good American citizens have been asking "Why do people hate us so?" I don't and I humbly feel sorry for what the good people of your country are currently going through.

I am not a person who can hate easily. I don't believe in the existence of an all might being so I cannot get brought into religious argument, even though I do have a deep understanding of many, many religions.

However back to my point. "Why do so many people hate Americans?"

the answer is simple:

"People like you, who are gladly a minority, but unfortunately because you have a big loud mouth you get heard"

I rest my case - now shut up!
http://www.dpnet.com.cn/forum/images/ {B5446200-AA78-11D5-A9A3-000629D58109}.jpg
Bomb Afghanistan until they are no longer on the map. Take that
little boy with them. Any bleeding heart liberal that wants to go
stand next to him can get blown up too!
 

Keyboard shortcuts

Back
Top