"Blowback"

[Tiarnan O'Corrain]

> >From: "Tiarnan O'Corrain"
> >
> > > From: David Morris [mailto:fqmorris at hotmail.com]
> > > >"The suicidal assassins of September 11, 2001, did not 'attack 
> >America,' as our political leaders and the news media like 
> to maintain; 
> >they attacked American foreign policy.
> > >
> > > The distinction being attempted above is a joke.
> >
> >Compare Albright on the Iraqi children, or the noxious notion of 
> >'collateral damage'. Is the US justified in bombing Iraq, 
> with immense cost 
> >in human life, to prosecute a war with Saddam Hussein, the 
> dictator of that 
> >country?
> 
> 1.  Are you equating an unprovoked direct massive attack on 
> civilians at the 
> WTC with the loss of human life inevitable in the course of a war?

Well, it is not for you to say whether the attack was provoked. I'm
sure whoever planned it felt provoked, tho' the provocation may not
have been direct, or obvious. Bin Laden, according to his declaration of
war on the US, sees the billetting of US troops in Saudi Arabia as
sufficient provocation. Also, Clinton's bombardment of a Sudanese
pharmaceutical factory (on the flimsiest of so-called evidence) would
provoke UBL, since he lived for some time in Sudan.

Second, I was not referring to the Gulf War, per se, but the sporadic
bombing campaign that succeeded it, which has caused much misery and
privation to the people of Iraq.

It could also be argued that since the US did not declare war on
Iraq (nor has it declared war on anyone, since World War II -- summat
about the presidential prerogative and fear of Congress's reaction --
directly subverting US democracy), the Gulf War itself was illegal. I'm 
not implying that, but certainly the subsequent bombing is.

> >If anything, since the USA is a democracy (unlike Iraq), it could be 
> >argued, cold-bloodedly, that US citizens have far more 
> responsibility for 
> >the actions of their leaders than the subjects of the tyrant 
> Saddam. In 
> >which case the attack on the World Trade Centre is less 
> seriously criminal 
> >than the US's undeclared war on Saddam.
>
> 2.  So, you're saying that since Saddam is a tyrant who 
> invaded Kuwait, our 
> war with his country was criminal?  With this reasoning can a 
> war ever be justified?

Interesting question. I'll refer it to philosophers and theologians.
Such people seem to believe in just wars. I believe only in defensive
wars, not the imperial expeditions that the US has carried out around
the globe since WWII.

Again, I'm referring, not the the UN-backed Gulf War, but to the illegal
subsqeuent bombing of Iraq, carried out by the US and its lackey, the UK.

> You can't go any further with your argument from here unless 
> you answer 
> "yes" to #1 above.  And if you do so answer we have nothing 
> further to talk 
> about.

Oh don't be such a simpleton. Of course the attack on the World Trade Centre
was an atrocious, evil act. It was not, however, unprecedented, or, indeed,
equal to some of the US's atrocities in the Middle East.

Y'know, one side being wrong doesn't make the other side right! Forget about
white hats, black hats, goodies (selflessly spreading the Gospel of
democracy
in Korea, Vietnam, the Phillippines, Central America, Chile and the Gulf),
and
baddies (pesky ragheads who are too brutish to accept their good fortune at
the
hands of the US). The world's a little more complex than that.

I suggest you moderate your spleen with some information. Hint: the
Telegraph
wouldn't be the place to get balanced reporting on the Middle East... Try
Le Monde (for the really good stuff), it's digested in Le Monde Diplomatique
(http://www.monde-diplomatique.fr), which is available for free on the web.
El Pais 
(http://www.elapis.es) is good, as is the Frankfurter Allgemeine
(http://www.faz.de). 
Fisk of the London Independent has been reporting on the Middle East for
years (http://www.independent.co.uk), and is always worth reading, even if
he gets the 
little artery above your eye jumping.

Also read bin Laden's Declaration of War. It's a valuable insight into the
man.

If you want to beat this guy, you'd better know a little about him and where
he
comes from. Jumping up and down and being outraged is easy	.

> David Morris

Tiarnan