THE SOLUTION FOR TERRORISM

JIMRPT@AOL.COM JIMRPT@AOL.COM
Sat, 29 Sep 2001 23:25:17 EDT


Roger I had promised myself I was not going to post any more on this subject 
but some of the things you have said just are incorrect and not justifiable 
at all......
In a message dated 29/09/01 8:51:01 PM, baldyam@sk.sympatico.ca writes:

<<"Make no mistake there while there is great support
Internationally for America over this horrendous disaster.  There is also a
great deal of pressure to exercise temperance.">>

 Give one instance so far in which the U.S. has not "execised restraint" in 
this current situation. Think rrrrreal hard now. Name one place we have 
bombed, one person we have killed, one town we have attacked.....just what do 
you call "restraint"???

<<"This is not AMERICA'S  NEW  WAR as you your press likes to brag and 
glorify, 
but a global problem.  Travel out side your own country, and you will see an
entirely different perspective.">>

  Perhaps it is not "Americas New War" but if it is the rest of the worlds 
'Old War'....Why is it still going on? Or does the rest of the "world" feel 
that it is beneath their dignity to sully their hands on the "terrorism" 
thingee?

<<"My home city in the UK is home to the Royal Marine Commando unit's. They 
are
already in Afghanistan.   Just like they were first  to go in, in the gulf
war.">>

 This is just a crock and that is not meant to demean the efforts and gallant 
duty performed by the SAS or the RMC's. While it is true that the only 
gunfight to have been reported was between a SAS unit and the Afghan Army it 
was because the SAS unit was almost caught by the Afghan Army and required 
the gunfight to get away.  The fact that a SAS unit has been reported in 
Afghan does not mean they are the 'only' units there or that they were there 
'first'. As for the Gulf War They were absoulutely not 'there first'...a good 
friend of mine was Commander of the first SW team in Kuwait they were 
inserted on the second day of the Kuwati Occupation by Iraq. And who was/is 
first doesn't make a hill of beans what does matter is that they are there.

<<"The Royal Air Force was responsible for taking out most of the air fields 
in
that war.   They quite efficiently grounded the Iraqi Air force.">>
 Wrong again. The airfield interdiction campaign was a joint assignment of 
the British, French and Italian airforce units that flew the Tornado 
aircraft. each flew aprox. the same number of interdiction missions and each 
suffered unacceptable casualties. This caused a change of tactics in the use 
of the Tornado and its weapon systems. To claim otherwise is not correct.

 As for <<"quite efficiently grounded the Iraqi Air force.">> Why were so 
many aircraft of the Iraqi air force shot down if they were so "efficiently 
grounded"? If they were so "efficiently grounded" how did aprox" 20% of their 
first line fighter aircraft and attack aircraft get flown to Iran? How do you 
mean "efficiently"?

 <<"Then the
killing spree started in Bagdad.   We all know what that solved.   There is
some mounting pressure in the UK that America does not conduct a repeat
performance. ">>
 "Killing spree" Roger ? What "killing spree", "in Bagdhad", are you speaking 
of? Are you talking of innocent civilians being bombed on purpose? Or are you 
talking of innocent civilians killed when military targets were bombed and 
the bombs either missed their targets and or who were killed in the 
explosions which destroyed the military targets?

<<"This not America's private war.   And America is not going to be the 
same.">>

Since the terrorists did what they did to Americans in American terrortory 
that makes it a "private" affair......that this country is trying to organize 
a joint will to fight terrorism in all its forms and in all its locations 
makes it a worldwide affair.
 If members of the United Kingdom were so great at fighting terrorism and 
keeping all peoples rights in sight then there would be no fighting, bombing 
and killing in Ireland for lo these many years...would there?
 As for "America never being the same"(sic) being your closest neighbor you 
should perhaps hope that we come awful danged close to "being the same" with 
our economies being so closely linked...and if we aren't ever going to be the 
same..in what ways are we going to be different?


<<"The
International community is hopefully going to force the US to be accountable
for their foreign policy.   90 day company balance sheets will no longer cut
it. ">>
 Would that every country were as accountable for their foreign policy as the 
U.S. is...as for the rest of the "International Community" "forcing" us to do 
anything on what moral ground are they going to force us? The "International 
Communities'" record on combating terrorism? or keeping their people fed? or 
keeping genocide from going on? or even so simple a matter of not allowing a 
flourishing slave trade? or as in the UK keeping people of one religion from 
killing another for no other reason than that one is Catholic and one 
Anglican???????

 OH if we had just captured Montreal when we had the chance!!! :-)
Jim Bryant (FL)



This PTG archive page provided courtesy of Moy Piano Service, LLC