'Idea of the day' trading in and out for profit

[Georgia Bard]

My response is simply a well and concise non war and peace composition unlike the propaganda for the Islams.

Crime or War? The Proper Response to the Terrorist Attacks in New York and Washington
http://www.aynrand.org/medialink/crimeorwar.shtml
September 17, 2001
By Dianne Durante

I am haunted by words from an Ayn Rand novel: "They don't want to live; they want you to die." Watching the smoke from thousands of lives and billions of dollars of property billow past my child's playground in New York on September 11th, I finally grasped what those words meant. The attacks on New York and Washington that day were obviously not just an attempt to strike at America's economy, defense, prestige or national symbols. These attacks, carried out at the beginning of a busy weekday in two of the most populous cities of the East Coast, were cold-bloodedly calculated to wreak maximum death and devastation.
The question—the immediate, essential, urgent question—is how to prevent more attacks by fanatics so zealous to kill Americans that they are willing to die doing it. Our proper response depends on whether this is a crime by individuals or an act of war by a foreign government. If it was a crime by an individual, like the Oklahoma City bombing, then we would gather the evidence and bring the perpetrator to trial. If it was a crime by individuals sponsored and abetted by a foreign government, then it was an act of war, and is a matter for military action: immediate and decisive. If the attack was in fact government-sponsored, then capturing and punishing individual killers is less crucial than preventing further attacks by the foreign government.
Mere hours after the bombings, there was already evidence that terrorist Osama bin Laden was involved. Bin Laden boasted weeks ago that "something big" would be happening soon. Convincing evidence indicates his involvement in earlier bombings, including the 1993 bombing of the World Trade Center (6 dead, over 1,000 wounded), the 1998 bombings of U.S. embassies in Kenya and Tanzania (224 dead, over 5,000 wounded), and the 2000 bombing of the USS Cole in the harbor of Aden (17 dead, 39 wounded). Bin Laden publicly proclaimed in 1998, "To kill Americans and their allies, both civil and military, is an individual duty of every Muslim who is able, in any country where this is possible." With such a record and such explicit statements, it is easy to believe that bin Laden masterminded the slaughter of September 11.
That, however, does not mean that he is solely responsible, or that eliminating him would eliminate terrorist activity against the United States. Why?
Bin Laden and his like could not operate without the knowledge, cooperation and approval of the governments in whose territory they encamped. Sometimes the cooperation is merely turning a blind official eye to the presence of sizeable enclaves where dozens or hundreds of armed men are being drilled in infiltration, communications, counter-intelligence, weapons, sabotage, murder. Sometimes the government is more active, providing weapons, men, supplies and money.
We have known for a long time which governments are active supporters of terrorists: Iran, Iraq, Syria, the Sudan, Libya, Afghanistan. They have constantly and explicitly abetted bin Laden and other terrorists, and have repeatedly refused to close down the training camps within their boundaries, or to extradite known terrorists. Given the hatred of these governments for the United States—its wealth, its pride, its technology, its emphasis on life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness—if bin Laden were killed tomorrow, they would eagerly fund others to take his place. The only way to stop further terrorist attacks is therefore to deal with the source—the countries who harbor terrorists.
We are at war, and we must respond accordingly, causing maximum damage as quickly as possible with minimum risk to and loss of American lives. We must deliver an ultimatum to Iran, Iraq, Syria, the Sudan, Libya and Afghanistan: within seven days, disarm your military, destroy all terrorist camps within your borders, and allow constant inspections henceforth to guarantee that you do not again become a threat to American citizens. If these countries fail to comply—which is extremely likely, given America's record of vacillation and weakness in the face of decades of terrorist attacks—we must unhesitatingly bomb the terrorist camps to rubble, AND raze the capitals of the countries in question, starting with Afghanistan. Blow them out of the 21st century and back to the period that had no respect for life, liberty and property: the Dark Ages.
What about the "innocent citizens" in those countries? Many danced in the streets with delight at the news that thousands of American civilians had been burned and crushed to death. If there are any true innocents among them, let them take those seven days to flee the capital and the country, or to rebel.
To retaliate against a country whose government aids and abets terrorists is not vengeance. It is not bloodlust. It is not murder. It is self-defense. They do not want to live: we do. Let's remove their threat so promptly and so decisively that no one will think of making it again—and then get on with our lives.

Every liberal and terrorist sympathizer or Islam "Poor Me" proagandaist should read this before they start ... lets help the "Poor Me" crock.


:=) Gary Swancey