SpinnerofTales
Posts: 1586
Joined: 5/30/2006
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: slvemike4u
Sorry Animus I can't accept that argument...the legitimate targeting of beligerants might and in fact often leads to death and injury to non beligerants...collateral damage.This is ,of course,to be regretted and lamented.The purposeful targeting of civilian,or so called soft targets,with the sole intention of sowing terror is not in the same discssion...and is actally an insult to professional slodiers whose job,redced to its most basic,is to kill the enemy.....beligerants.
I realise you included a disclaimer but I don't think it covered it.Using sperior technology in the rosection of legitimate war time goals....has nothing in common with terrorism aimed solely at soft ,civilian targets!
At the risk of being accused of defending terrorism, I think you are overlooking some serious considerations here.
Imagine yourself to feel attacked by an enemy that outnumbers you thousands to one. They have an overwhelming superiority in personnel, equipment and every material needed to wage war or resist occupation. In that case, any conventional warfare becomes not only suicide but suicide that will accomplish nothing. For such people, terrorism IS the pursuit of their goals given the technology and resources available.
The selection of soft targets offers a range of strong results against the enemy. Just look at the results of the 9/11 attack. At the cost of a handful of operatives, a symbol of vulnerability was established, the United States government was altered to become more totalitarian, and we became embroiled in not one but two wars that has done untold damage to our economy. Contrast this with the reaction possible had the same number of operatives with the same amount of resources had attempted an attack on any military target.
It is also important to remember that those who do this do not see themselves as 'terrorists", or if they do, consider that not to be a bad term. There was a line in the play 1776 that comes to mind. "Revolution is always legal in the first person, as in 'our revolution' it's only in the third person, 'their revolution' that it becomes illegal." Likewise, for those who are victims or disagree with those doing these things, these people are terrorists. To those who agree with their cause, they are "freedom fighters"
This is why, no matter how much we spend on fighting terrorism, we will never eradicate the willingness of some people to use it as a tactic. The only defense is defense...to do all we can to prevent these attacks from being successful.
< Message edited by SpinnerofTales -- 12/5/2009 3:26:38 PM >
|
RE: I guess Obama doesnt care what other nations think - 
Profile
. 
) 
New Messages
No New Messages
Hot Topic w/ New Messages
Hot Topic w/o New Messages
Locked w/ New Messages
Locked w/o New Messages
Post New Thread