[Vision2020] Tony Simpsom Shills for Terrorists Yet Again!

[Saundra Lund]

Tony wrote:
 "Had we employed tactics like Truman did against the Japanese . . . "

Last I checked, Tony, the morality of one of this country's darkest moments
(using the atomic bomb against civilians) is still being hotly -- and
validly -- debated.

It seems to me that targeting innocent noncombatants for annihilation to
force a third party to do or not do something like make policy changes is a
pretty good definition of terrorism.  Don't you think it sounds an awful lot
like what happened on September 11, 2001?

It also sounds an awful lot like what happened with the decision to bomb
Hiroshima & Nagasaki only in that case, our decision to resort to terrorism
resulted in the deaths of nearly a QUARTER OF A MILLION INNOCENT men, women,
and children :-(

Are you trying to say, Tony, that terrorism is OK if you decide it's OK?
Or, that terrorism is OK if you win?  Or, that terrorism is OK if it's the
US that's the terrorist?  Or, that the ends justify the means???

Sorry, Tony -- none of those dogs hunt.



Saundra Lund
Moscow, ID

The only thing necessary for the triumph of evil is for good people to do
nothing.
- Edmund Burke

***** Original material contained herein is Copyright 2006, Saundra Lund.
Do not copy, forward, excerpt, or reproduce outside the Vision 2020 forum
without the express written permission of the author.*****



-----Original Message-----
From: vision2020-bounces at moscow.com [mailto:vision2020-bounces at moscow.com]
On Behalf Of Tony
Sent: Saturday, November 11, 2006 7:17 AM
To: Matt Decker
Cc: vision2020 at moscow.com
Subject: Re: [Vision2020] Tet Offensive

Matt,

Your thoughtful exchange with Sunil prompts this musing....

It is troubling that so many folks expect the administration to provide for
their security while attempting to micro-manage all conflicts from their
armchair.  I too tend to trust those in a position to know, who also seem to
me to be men and woman of intelligence and fair mindedness - the Bushes,
Cheneys, RUMSFELDS and Rices.  And yup, we have not utilized our military to
its full capability or we would have celebrated an adequate victory by now. 
Had we employed tactics like Truman did against the Japanese, or Sherman did
against the south, or as Mac Arthur wanted to against the Soviets, many of
the threats we face today would not have materialized in the first place. 
The senators and brass monkeys back home are influenced by their
constituents, who are misinformed and dispirited by a predominantly disloyal
and deceitful, liberal media.  You correctly note that the primary problem
in Iraq and Vietnam is and was politicians and journalists dictating
military policy rather than generals.

Your observation about the coverage of the mosque in Fallujah where Al-Zar
punk-boy was hiding was also correct.  We should have ignored the
collaborating subversives in our media and allowed the generals to blast the
bastard, mosque and all, right into Allah's lap.  This only sounds bad to
those who haven't the stomach for what is unavoidable to achieve victory or
the sense to defer to those who do.

As far as expediency in war is concerned, sometimes you have to cut off a
finger to save a hand.  If by killing innocents as we clearly did at Dresden
or with the A-bomb, we are able to pre-empt the death of  MANY TIMES that
number, which was Truman's conclusion, we have done what we had to do.  It
is cruel in the extreme for those not saddled with such wrenching decisions
to condemn the conclusions acted upon by those who are.

Yes, the media tend to focus on the EXCEPTIONS rather than the RULE as far
as our troops actions are concerned - ignoring the good and endlessly
highlighting the occasional exception such as Abu Graub (sp?).

Anywho, hope you had a good weekend,     -Tony