Kellan
BWO Team Member

Registered: Jul 2000
Location: Milton Keynes, UK
Posts: 1216 |
I've watched with a kind of numb shock, and even felt physically sick after seeing the events at WTC on Tuesday. I offer my condolences and sympathies towards all of those touched by tragedy, as small as my contribution to this support is. The stories coming out of the area, such as Geezer's, are horrible ones that will stay with me forever.
However, at the same time as we mourn the dead, and respect their loss, serious questions need to be asked. Perhaps these will be painful and complex, and perhaps they will not have entirely agreeable answers. Nevertheless, they must be asked. Beyond the "should we use ground troops or just nukes" debate there MUST be one about the sanctity of life, primarily. The hard questions about the failures of U.S. Security, and the contribution of Western foreign policy towards this event may be able to wait (and they will need a lot of attention, patience and forbearance), but a question about retaliation must be posed now.
Let's assume for a moment that Osama bin Laden did assist in this terrible act in some way. What is the response that we want here? Should he be killed - with or without trial, his motives explored or ignored? What will this action result in? A thousand more 'martyrs' for the cause? A true end to terrorism on a massive scale?
Furthermore, and far more crucially, can the civilians of a country enduring a 3-year drought, 5.5 million of whom are surviving on food aid, who have no television, newspapers, running water, electricity; no concept at all of what the World Trade Centre even was be held responsible for the attacks that may have originated from their country? By killing civilians deliberately, or as collateral damage do we not lower ourselves to the base level of the terrorists? The fact of the matter is, there are too few extremists for a 'proportionate' response, and too far spread, burrowed too deeply for immediate vengeance to be exacted with any degree of accuracy.
Even from the perspective of the U.S. military there are serious issues regarding Afghanistan. Britain fought two wars and lost both, and even the might of the Soviet Union was crushed in the mountains so unsuited for our concepts of warfare. Afghanistan was, for the Soviets, a Vietnam-type event. What's to say that it won't become another, once again?
You may call me a heretic for not chanting along with the majority for more blood and more death. Do so if you like. One of the great strengths of the internet for the debate of ideas is that you can only attack my ideas, not me. Debate is raised beyond the physical.
Sooner or later these questions have to be asked. The sooner we start, and the longer we debate, the clearer and better the answers may be. I'd also like to point out I'm not Anti-American (I fully intend to study America as part of my University degree).
Oh, and sorry to go all wordy, but it's a serious issue and I've given it a lot of thought. 
Thank you.
__________________
"...And so the Sol rebellion was crushed by the mighty literary powers of Kellan."
[url="http://freespace.volitionwatch.com/blackwater"]BlackWater Ops[/url]
Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged
|