Global Conflict

[Mark Harris]

David wrote:

< What you 
have 
done is assume that this administration will pursue a
pointless attack 
on 
Afganistan for mere political pandering to the
blood-lust at home.  So 
far 
you have no proof for that assumption.  As more and
more Americans are 
educated to the pitiful history of Afghanistan, the
less they see 
massive 
bombing of the country as a satisfactory option. 
However, leaving in 
place 
a Taliban which harbors Bin Laden and others who've
declared a 
terrorist war 
against the US is not an option either.  And other
_governments_ which 
sponsor/harbor terrorism cannot be left alone either.

So instead of assuming the worst about the goals and
methods of this 
War on 
Terrorism while ignoring the cost of doing nothing,
try being honestly 
realistic in searching for solutions to an
unacceptable situation. >

I agree with this 100%. As I indicated the other day,
it seems to me that the U.S. government has been
extraordinarily temperate in its response to the
situation so far - yet the alarmism in certain
knee-jerk leftist circles is running out of control.
Surely the government must respond in some way, and
they are currently gathering information, beefing up
security, exhorting against anti-Arab and anti-Muslim
violence, building coalitions, applying diplomatic
pressure, and exploring options. I'm not a Republican,
but I honestly don't see what there is to argue with
here.

Rich wrote:

< there are more than 200 Brits missing and I'm sure a
bunch of other 
non-US 
citizens >

Citizens of 62 nations were killed in the attack,
according to the latest State Department figures. They
didn't call it the World Trade Center for nothing.
This was truly a strike against the civilized global
community, not just against the United States.

Mark R. Harris

__________________________________________________
Terrorist Attacks on U.S. - How can you help?
Donate cash, emergency relief information
http://dailynews.yahoo.com/fc/US/Emergency_Information/