World War III

[Guest guest]

craig from a sis of maria in ny,......i personally am in total agreeance with your thoughts, views, and opinions on the subject bin laden. as a service connected veteran of the usnavy, i personally feel these evildoers are fully prepared to hit us again, that is before we do anything. there is not one person to include our intell dept. who can crack or decipher bin ladens communications.as for my sis maria in ny, i came to visit her today as she has gone bonkers with the rest of us nyers, but as i told maria, as long as you are right with yourself inside the heart and you have made all your ammends, if your time comes to end with an unexpected hit,you will go and excell to a better and greater journey than this one. thank you for affording me this great opprounity to meet you due to my neice kristinas nf2life line cntr. always with pride and patriotism, grace, ret. usn

[Guest guest]

It is ideas rhetoric like this that will be the down fall of all of us.

What did the poor mountain people of Afghanistan ever do to deserve to be slaughtered by United States bombs? I don't think they give a rat's ass about Bin Laden and his holy wars. They just struggle every single day to survive. They have already been through hell with the Russian invasion. Now folks in the United States want to blow them away. Sad.

Even though Bin Laden and his sect may be in the country, I don't for one minute support killing any other innocent people. Enough blood has been shed right here and if we strike out at innocents, we are no better than the terrorists.

Instead of talking about who we will kill, let's talk about who we can save.

Bette

[Guest guest]

wow. well written!

[Guest guest]

Damn, Craig, you need to send this in to a newspaper

or something. It articulates my feelings 100%!

Nate

--- Craig Baumann wrote:

> Many people believe that if we defeat Osama bin

> Laden then the job will be finished. He is a only

> one piece of the overall problem.

> Many of us believe that if we simply eliminate bin

> Laden and beef up airline security (like the

> Israeli's have done) that the Terrorism problem will

> be greatly improved. This is wrong. There are many

> Terrorists from other cells who are in our country

> right now, waiting to perform other acts or terror.

> A twin engine cargo plane can easily be rented and

> loaded with 4,000 pounds of fertilizer (like the

> Oklahoma City bombing) and flown into a football

> stadium and easily kill a large portion of 70,000

> people. Sadam Hussein's germ warfare factories can

> transport into our country via a truckload of

> produce coming through Mexico. This can then be

> distributed into the subway systems of our largest

> cities and/or our water supplies next week. There

> are many methods of Terrorism that can be

> implemented.

> With the exception of Israel, all of the countries

> in the middle East are not peaceful democracies.

> ALL OF THEM are despicable governments;

> dictatorships or quasi-dictatorships enforced only

> by their military, not the ballot box.

> We have to insist that every country in the world

> supports us, the " good guys " . Either you are with

> us or against us. If you want to be neutral, like a

> Switzerland, then we must assume that you are a

> stealth enemy, and we must destroy you. Hey Germany

> and France, are you listening? These greedy cowards

> have been doing business with Iraq. They have

> ignored the sanctions against Iraq, thus helping to

> fund its development and production of chemical,

> biological, and nuclear weapons. They need to stop

> it right now or they too should be considered an

> enemy and we will have to be destroyed. Thank you

> Australia for doing the putting principle and morals

> above profits and not doing business with Iraq.

> Make no mistake about it, this is a battle for the

> future of the civilized world. This is good vs.

> evil. The Islamic Terrorists believe that the World

> must all be Islamic. They are mad as hell that they

> lost their foothold on the European continent

> centuries ago when they were expelled from Spain.

> We must use all means necessary to destroy the

> enemy, using the means that will cause the least

> amount of casualties of our troops. This means that

> if Afghanistan does not execute bin Laden today and

> ship us his body tomorrow then we should turn the

> entire country into the largest man-made lake. Yes

> use Nuclear weapons, it was the right thing to use

> to end World War II and it is the right thing to use

> now. Any country that impedes our effort should

> meet a similar fate. If we proceed with " The War

> against Terrorism " like we have with our " War on

> Drugs " , it too will fail.

> International Terrorism is an un-acceptable form of

> actions that if used must result in the destruction

> of any country that tolerates it to any degree. We

> should give ultimatums to countries that tolerate it

> to stop any association with it or face a long

> nuclear winter: Iraq, Iran, Syria, Pakistan, Libya,

> Sudan, North Korea, etc.

> Unfortunately bin Laden has already survived without

> retaliation after three horrible attacks: 1) 1993

> World Trade Center bombing, 2) 1998 bombing of two

> of our embassies, and 3) 2000 bombing of the USS

> Cole. Unfortunately our previous Commander in Chief

> did not use " any means necessary " to eliminate bin

> Laden after any of these tragedies. The fact that

> we did not act properly has given encouragement to

> other Terrorist groups like Hamas, Hezbolah, and

> many more. They think that we are a fat, lazy, and

> docile " sleeping giant " (we have been like this up

> to this point)

> I am madder than hell and I am not going to take it

> any more!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

>

> Craig

>

>

>

__________________________________________________

Terrorist Attacks on U.S. - How can you help?

Donate cash, emergency relief information

http://dailynews.yahoo.com/fc/US/Emergency_Information/

[Guest guest]

What Does Osama Bin Laden Want?

Nothing we have.

By Plotz

http://slate.msn.com/Assessment/01-09-13/Assessment.asp

To no one's surprise, Secretary of State Colin

today named Osama

Bin Laden as a prime suspect in Tuesday's attacks.

Bin Laden's brutal

record is well known. The United States indicted him

for masterminding

the 1998 bombings of U.S. embassies in Kenya and

Tanzania. The Saudi

fugitive was also reportedly connected to the 1993

World Trade Center

bombing, the 1993 killing of American soldiers in

Somalia, mid-'90s

bombings of U.S. facilities in Saudi Arabia, and the

2000 attack on the

USS Cole. Authorities have prevented Bin Laden

associates from

launching attacks during the millennium celebrations,

bombing a dozen

trans-Pacific flights in 1995, and assassinating the

pope and President

Clinton in the Philippines.

This is what Bin Laden does. But why does he do it?

What does he want?

(If you want more background about Bin Laden's

personal history and

about how his organization, al-Qaida ( " The

Base " ), works, click here.)

Bin Laden is the most notorious advocate of a potent

strain of militant

Islam that has been gaining popularity in the Muslim

world for 30

years. It is simultaneously theological and cultural.

Its fundamental

tenet is that the Muslim world is being poisoned and

desecrated by

infidels. These infidels include both outsiders such

as the United

States and Israel, and governments of Muslim

states—such as Egypt and

Jordan—that have committed apostasy. The infidels

must be driven out of

the Muslim world by a jihad, and strict Islamic rule

must be

established everywhere that Muslims live. These

extreme " Islamists, " as

Bin Laden biographer Yossef Bodansky dubs them, hope

to re-establish

the Caliphate, the golden age of Muslim domination

that followed the

death of Muhammad. They regard the Taliban's

Afghanistan as a model for

such Islamic rule.

This Islamist militancy has ancient roots—Saladin's

expulsion of the

crusaders in the 12th century is one starting

point—but it was

galvanized in the 1970s by several events. The

growing influence of

secular Western capitalism in the Muslim world, the

military triumphs

of Israel, and the Russian invasion of Afghanistan horrified

Islamic

traditionalists. The Afghanistan invasion was the

culminating moment:

It persuaded Bin Laden and thousands of others of the

need for Islamic

holy war. Their fervor has only increased since,

fueled by the

Palestinian intifada, the Gulf War, the American

operation in Somalia,

and other conflicts of Islam with the West.

(The Islamists are not merely Pan-Arab but

Pan-Islamic. Bin Laden is

exceptional in his ability to recruit from all over

the Muslim world.

The Sunni Muslim world, that is. Bin Laden and his

allies follow a very

strict Sunni Islam.)

That is Bin Laden's general philosophy. What is his

particular

grievance against the United States? According to

CNN's Bergen,

author of a forthcoming book on Bin Laden, Holy War,

Inc., Bin Laden is

most enraged by the American military presence in

Saudi Arabia. Bin

Laden was incensed when the Saudis invited U.S.

troops to their defense

after the Iraqi invasion of Kuwait. Bin Laden—like

many Muslims—

considers the continued presence of these armed

infidels in Saudi

Arabia the greatest possible desecration of the holy

land. That is why

he sponsored bombings of the American military

facilities in Saudi

Arabia, why he has tried to destabilize the Saudi

government, and why

the embassies in Kenya and Tanzania were bombed on

Aug. 7, 1998—eight

years to the day after the first American troops were

dispatched to

Saudi Arabia.

Bin Laden is also furious about American support for

Israel. He detests

Jews and views the United States as the Jewish

lackey. ( " [Jews] believe

that all humans are created for their use, and they

found that the

Americans are the best-created beings for that

use, " Bin Laden has

said.) His supporters seem particularly exercised by

Israel's reaction

to the current intifada, Bergen says. Bin Laden also

can't tolerate

American alliances with moderate Arab governments in

Egypt, Jordan,

Saudi Arabia, and Kuwait.

Mainstream Muslims denounce Bin Laden's

bloody-mindedness—in 1998 he

issued a fatwa calling for attacks on all

Americans—but he has found

plenty of firebrand clerics to offer Quranic backing

for his belief

that terrorism is glorious. According to Bodansky,

these mullahs insist

that all methods of war, including terrorism, are

justified in the

battle against the infidels. (Bin Laden, holding up a

Quran, puts it

this way: " You cannot defeat the heretic with

this book alone. You have

to show them the fist. " )

Bin Laden has strategic reasons to believe in

terrorism, too. The

Muslim victory over the Soviet Union in Afghanistan

showed him that

superpowers are not so superpowerful. And the

ignominious American

withdrawal from Somalia—following a Bin Laden

connected attack—

convinced him that the United States is morally weak.

The U.S. soldier

is " a paper tiger " who crumples after

" a few blows. "

It is a mistake to assume that killing Bin Laden

means killing his

movement. It's true that Bin Laden is an iconic

leader who inspires his

followers and millions of sympathizers in the Muslim

world. But

eliminating Bin Laden would do nothing to decrease

the intensity of the

other militant Islamists. The Afghan war created a

cadre of warriors

and belligerent clerics who are constantly

recruiting. Bin Laden has a

core of highly trained aides ready to continue his

work. His trainees

are scattered in two dozen countries. It is hard to

imagine how the

United States could neutralize all of them. And

attacks on Bin Laden

have only increased his popularity: Killing him would

likely rally many

more Muslims to his cause.

(Some pundits have suggested that killing Bin Laden

would be effective

because it would stanch the flow of cash to

terrorists. This may not be

so. Bin Laden's groups do get funds from his personal

fortune, but they

also finance operations by dunning wealthy Gulf Arabs

and by siphoning

off donations to Muslim charities. And the terror

organization is

cheap. They don't use heavy weapons, and it costs

almost nothing to

house and train hundreds of men in Afghanistan.)

Is there anything we can do to persuade Bin Laden to

stop? The terror

groups Americans are familiar with—Palestinian

bombers and hijackers,

IRA hard men—have desires we understand. They perform

acts of terror in

order to gain sympathy or sow fear. That sympathy or

fear is a means to

their end: political recognition, a state,

compensation. They seek to

participate in our world.

But Bin Laden and his followers are alarming because

they don't want

anything from us. They don't want our sympathy. They

want no material

thing we can offer them. They don't want to

participate in the

community of nations. (They don't really believe in

the nation-state.)

They are motivated by religion, not politics. They

answer to no one but

their god, so they certainly won't answer to us.

Bob the Wholeone

[Guest guest]

First of all, I apologize for getting some crew members upset with my thoughts. Indeed, I am very angry with the tragedy of our fallen fellow brothers and sisters and I am upset that Terrorism in all countries has not been an important issue until now. I am pleased with President Bush and the decision process of collecting a world unity against Terrorism. My intent was to reveal that Terrorism will not be stopped by the capturing of one man, bin Laden and that other terrorists are still in our country. My wife attends school meetings just a few blocks from where two of the hijackers lived. Thank God that the school was not a target. Our children are already in peril, our whole world is in peril. The world is not black and white, but the decision to accept or eliminate Terrorism is black and white, a choice that world leaders, up to now, have neglected to make.

"Those who fail to learn from history are doomed to repeat its mistakes" Evil has and must be defeated with overwhelming force.

World War II is an example. Who did the right thing? Neville Chamberlain with his proclamation of "Peace in our Time" or President Truman who used the A-Bomb to end the war without sacrificing any more Allied lives. Military estimates listed 800,000 to 1,000,000 as the amount of Allied casualties that we would have occurred through an invasion of Japan.

Has Libya dared to kill any more Americans since President Reagan bombed Colonel Quadaffi's palace in response to his attacks on our people? Our military response on his palace killed one of his daughters.

How did we defeat the Soviet Union, through compromise or through military strength? Isn't it amazing to realize that we actually have to explain to our children that there actually was such a thing as the Cold War?

Two days ago Pakistan was threatening the U.S. that if we went after Afghanistan that severe consequences would result. Now Pakistan has offered its full cooperation. How did this happen, by us saying "Please" or through our threats of Military force?

Secretary of Defense Rumsfeld when asked on Friday if tactical Nuclear weapons would be considered responded, "All options are open" It has been discovered that during the Persian Gulf War President Bush sent a communiqué to Saddam Hussein that if he used any chemical or biological weapons against our troops (like he had done in Iraq's war with Iran) that the U.S. would respond with Nuclear weapons which would turn Iraq into a "Nuclear toilet bowl"

President Bush said yesterday for the first time, "We're at War". We can either bury our head in the sand and deny that reality or support those Countries on our side with our thoughts and prayers. I am the first one for a peaceful resolution, but when faced with War, our leaders should use all options available in fighting this War.

Craig

Who judges people by their heart and not by the color of their skin nor religious beliefs.