Re: [Leica] we're ok

[Teresa299@aol.com]

In a message dated 9/12/01 3:16:05 AM, bdcolen2001@yahoo.ca writes:

>This is indeed the time to be discussing the high
>explosives of vengeance, because if the U.S. does not
>retaliate, and retaliate in a massive way, Tuesday's
>horror will be repeated over and over.


Retaliation will be satisfying to some, but don't think that retaliation 
alone will stop terrorism.  Just look at Israel.  They have a top notch 
intelligence operation as well as special ops units that put the NSA, CIA and 
US forces to shame.  They have "taken out" (killed/assasinated) a large 
number of real, suspected terrorists as well as a number of unfortunate 
innocents (in the form of so-called collateral damage).  Even with all of 
Israel's proactive as well as retaliatory killing, terrorism is still a major 
fact of life there.  Why?  Because you can take out one or two or even ten to 
fifty terrorists, but if the refugee camps are breeding fifty to sixty to 
replace them, then you really haven't succeeded in eradicating the causes of 
terrorism, have you?

The sad fact is that there are a number of people who are willing to kill 
themselves in order to further their cause/s.   This time the weapons were 
airliners, next time bombs, nuclear devices, a barge, whatever.   The US 
could put a cop on every corner of every intersection in every state and that 
still wouldn't stop those compelled to give their lives for their cause.    I 
would suggest that retaliation will be a "feel good" remedy that will 
rightfully allow those who have lost loved ones to feel some sense of 
"justice."  But I wouldn't even begin to imagine that such retaliation, no 
matter how severe or ramboesque is going to match what is compelling those to 
become suicide bombers in the first place--since they are suicide 
terrorists--and thus, already willing to pay the ultimate price.

Respectfully, 
Kim