posted on September 25, 2001 09:39:09 PM
Below is a quote from the book "Fighting Back; Winning the War Against Terrorism" Livingston and Arnold 1984.
The quote is about the tactics recommended by Sec of State under Ron Regan, George Shultz. Reproduced here under the Fair Use doctrine.
"In a speech on October 25,1984, at the Park Avenue Synagogue in New
York City, Shultz's frustrations over U.S. inaction in the face of the mounting
terrorist challenge boiled over. In the strongest speech on the subject yet de-
livered by a senior U.S. policymaker, Shultz declared that the United States
must be ready to use military force to fight international terrorism and per-
haps even retaliate before all of the facts about a specific terrorist attack are
known, noting that "we may never have the kind of evidence that can stand up in an American court of law." He said the United States should also be prepared to accept the loss of some innocent lives as a collateral result of its retaliation. "We cannot allow ourselves to become the Hamlet of nations,"
he concluded, "worrying endlessly over whether and how to respond. A great
nation with global responsibilities cannot afford to be hamstrung by confu-
sion and indecisiveness. Fighting terrorism will not be a clean or pleasant
contest, but we have no choice but to play it."
Shultz's remark set off a heated controversy [within the administration and the media]. "
We never followed Shultz's recommendations, and now we have 6000 innocent Americans attacked and killed right here on US soil. G. Bush the First was one of those who said we should not follow Schultz's policy. Now it appears we must adopt this policy since the other way doesn't work.
This book is a good read other than the now irrelevant meanderings about the USSR's involvement in terrorism.
The bottom line then as now, is, we don't know for certain who is behind these acts nor how to deal with them without the possibility of collateral damage.
posted on September 26, 2001 09:12:09 AM
How about BIN - Bomb It Now!
[i]We cannot allow ourselves to become the Hamlet of nations," he concluded, "worrying endlessly over whether and how to respond. A great nation with global responsibilities cannot afford to be hamstrung by confu-
sion and indecisiveness. Fighting terrorism will not be a clean or pleasant
contest, but we have no choice but to play it." [/i] It's true & a damm shame that even today the PTB don't reconize that! bobbi355 posted on September 25, 2001 08:17:44 PM I heard on one of the news channels (can't remember which one now) that the reason they changed from "Infinite Justice" was because it "offended" the Muslems - that only Allah could bring about "infinite justice". (no joke). We should have stood up right there and then & said "we are done worring about offending anyone!" "6,000+ people are dead, thousands directly effected & you want us to worry about your FEELINGS?" "In a word, NO!"
posted on September 26, 2001 01:39:27 PM
Ronald Reagan faced a similar situation as G W Bush, only with far fewer casualties.
If you look at Reagan's National Security Decision Directive 138 , it reads EXACTLY as Bush's positions on terrorism.
Reagan did NOTHING.
If we catch bin Laden, that will be the end of our "taking the war to the terrorists".
There simply isn't the political will by the American people and International community support to go after countries that are supporting these terrorist.
The terrorist networks know it. It is part of their strategy.
The fundementalist muslim support network runs through many countries. There is not enough troops to operate a police action in all of them.
We will again fail to either realize who the enemy is or go after those that have sworn death to America and the populations that support them.
The terrorists know it, and set back and smugley say that catching bin Laden will not end their attacks.
There is also a disconnect between what the government heads in the region say and what the populations think and act upon. Pakistan has pledged support, but the population did not. The network inside Pakistan will suicide bomb and otherwise attack our bases in Pakistan.
Iran has been positively identified as a state sponsor of terrorism, but we are on the verge of allying with them to get bin Laden. Iran also desparately wants to purchase Russian atomic reactors. Iran is not pledging support for nothing.
The government of UAE has pledged support, yet the money trail for the terrorists has led to the UAE.
The U.S. using weapons of mass destruction can not be ruled out, and may be needed to let the active and passive supporters of terrorists know that killing our people right in our country will cause their own complete destruction. It will also have an effect on the suicide bombers, if they know that they run the risk of causing the complete distruction of their people.
The Russians have tried a police action in Chechnya and it is a dismal failure. The rebels in Chechnya are also connected to bin Laden.
Strangely enough, the economic fallout from the attack of 9-11 will have more of a political effect here in the U.S. than the actual murder of 6000, towards taking resolute action in the regions that support the terrorists.
The battle cry will become - "It's the economy , Stupid!!".
[ edited by REAMOND on Sep 26, 2001 01:41 PM ]
[ edited by REAMOND on Sep 26, 2001 01:43 PM ]
posted on September 27, 2001 09:50:45 PMzilvy..That’s the funniest thing I’ve
seen all week.....I printed it up and show it to everyone
I saw today..It was a big hit..nice job Baaaaaby.......
