aw. RE: The Nobel Prize for War 2009 goes to ...

[Michael Bailey]

>
>  But as some have correctly pointed out, while campaigning Obama called
>  the war in Afghanistan a war of necessity" as opposed to Iraq (war of
>  choice).  And he did say he would increase efforts there while ending
>  the war in Iraq.  So, though he's following an unpopular path, it
>  shouldn't be taken as breaking his promises.
>

right.  's I recall, old Mullah Omar said he'd give up Osama assuming
he could find the dude, to an international tribunal like ICJ or something.

Why was that unacceptable?
not a slam-dunk, imho.  the old lex talionis or whatever it's called
isn't how we are supposedly doing things nowadays and we belong
to international peacekeeping bodies.
A day in international court would still be much more credible to
everybody concerned.

Taliban was a separate entity, encouraged and created by American money
in the first place to beat back the Soviet Union.  To confute them with
bin Laden is to obscure the differences.

But then, obscuring a lot of inconvenient facts, harrumph,
"the first casualty of war is truth" - (eg, there are so many juicy
facts about 9-11 that people just cover their ears and go "LALALALALA")

also, if you have a population of 250 mill, right,
and maybe, what, 10% in the army or defense industries,
and another 10% also depending on same for their daily bread,

hmmm, they are the ones
who have the guns
and disagreein' with them
ain't always so fun


-- 
- "The doctor said give him jug band music; it seems to make him feel
just fine!"