|
I don't see any reason why this thread should be closed. Plenty of other offensive posts have remained. If we can discuss this as adults, rather than result to flaimng and name-calling, I believe this could be a productive discussion.
"I may not agree with a word you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it."--Voltaire''
Now my opinion on the attacks themselves:
Terrorism has been going on for YEARS back by Bin Laden. Each time the USA has been a victim of a strike, we have arrested a few individuals and then let the rest go, seeking diplomatic solutions. The original WTC bombing in 1995 and subsequent attacks on US Embassies in Africa attest to this.
The people we are up against will not settle for diplomatic solutions. We want them to stop attacking us, they want nothing from us. You can't bargain if you have nothing to offer.
Therefore, the only thing left to do is detroy their ability to continue these attacks in any way we know how. If that means civilian deaths, it is unfortunate, but there is no other option.
And finally, my most controversial opinion for which I will certainly get attacked:
We are at war. It is the nature of war that it leads to casualties. So who should be the first to go? A starving, opressed woman in Afghanistan, or a productive member of American society. I am not trying to say that you can place value on a life or judge someone in that manner, but why are we worried about Afghan citizens at the expense of our own? Why is it a crime to kill Afghan civilians, yet not a crime to leave ourselves open to attack? Isn't is just as much a crime if the government allows Americans to be sacrificed?
Like I said, my opinions are not popular, but I try to present them in an appropriate manner.
|