|
|||||||||
Posted October 2, 2001
War Without End
Thank you, Nebojsa, for your fantastic piece -- "War Without End"....
Does
the bombing of the WTC represent a sea change in US policy
toward the Muslim takeover of the heart of SE Europe?
Or are Serbia/Montenegro/Macedonia/Kosovo etc, just cards
the Bush administration will play under the table while
ostensibly "fighting" terrorism? Lay off the
US and see -- we're giving you the Balkans! Here, you
can have Kashmir and please take Chechnya and the "-stans"
while you're at it, (all we ask is to be left alone let
us help ourselves to Central Asia's oil).
~ Sanshisan
Nebojsa Malic replies:
I wanted to think that the US declaration of "war on terrorism" would mean a major policy shift in the Balkans. Evidence, however, indicates this is not the case -- from NATO's continued championing of the KLA in Macedonia and Kosovo, to America's forceful denial that Albania had anything to do with bin Laden, ever.
Apparently, some people still think it's possible to eliminate "bad" terrorists while continuing to use "good" ones to forward policy goals. By compartmentalizing the "war on terrorism," they think they will somehow avoid the inevitable disastrous consequences of heavily investing in Bosnia, Albania, and the Caucasus. Time will tell, of course, but I think we already know the answer.
UAE
In your 29 September reply to Ron Whitaker, you wrote:
"They were originally from Saudi Arabia, Egypt, and UAE -- all US allies."
The UAE was implicated initially because of a couple of driving licenses issued there in that country. But none of them was from the UAE or had a UAE passport. I got the related articles, info from your website.
The "Backtalk" editor replies:
The "authorities" have reversed a number of their earlier statements, and seem pretty unsure of the information that they have. Click here for a September 28 CNN profile of the hijackers. It includes very little information about the suspects' backgrounds and the warning that "the names used by the suspects may have been stolen identities."
We Want War!
What Muslims need to realize is that we need to fight, kill, and terrorize with same resolve as those who attacked us if we are going to win this battle. We need to scare any country that harbors any and all Crusaders into killing or expelling the Crusaders in their countries and closing their borders to any future Crusaders. But, above all, Islam needs to exact revenge on those responsible for the Crusaders' strikes.
I
don't care what reason the Crusaders had for attacking
Islam. I don't care if Islam is hard on other countries.
I don't care how our policies influence other countries.
I don't care if our
imposed retribution causes every man, woman, and child
to starve to death in the United States. All I care about
is Islam. And Islam was attacked, so now all I care about
is Islam and revenge on those who want to destroy Islam.
At this point I don't even care about justice. All
me and millions of my fellow Muslim brethren want is blood
revenge! Any true patriot would not accept anything less.
We want war!
~ JF
The "Backtalk" editor explains:
The original letter was written by an American "patriot." After receiving a seemingly endless stream of such letters, we decided to have a little fun: we substituted "Muslims," "Islam," and "Iraq" for "America," "Americans," and "the United States." We also substituted "Crusaders" for "terrorists," and "retribution" for "sanctions."
The Moral High Ground
I
love the fact that you have the right to speak as you
do, you also have many good points at times. If war comes,
and I think at this point that it should, it will be quite
terrible indeed. I am at this time looking into rejoining
the USARMY so that I can support my country in the coming
trials and tribulations.
The reason I say that that this war should come is not
the obvious. It is what I have read at the following:
["Afghan Women First Victims of Terrorism," Fox News, September 18, 2001, by Wendy McElroy.]
Sometimes
war is not only necessary, but also quite compelling by
the need of righting that which is unjust. As long as
we work diligently to keep the moral high ground. And
look at the Afghan people as the author of that story
suggests. We will be freeing the oppressed.
~ Chad U.
The "Backtalk" editor replies:
"Keep the moral high ground"? Maybe you missed the news: the US Government armed and funded the Muslim extremists in Afghanistan.
Profanities
[Regarding Justin Raimondo's column of September 17, "The Third World War":]
As a longtime supporter of your political writings, I was profoundly disappointed in your column of yesterday. Despite your well thought out articles, I had long suspected that you lacked the maturity and respectability required of someone in your position of influence.
It is unfortunate that you cannot handle dirty looks from a young mother that you get for looking like a smoke-at-the-side-of-the-road bum, without resorting to calling her profanities and insulting her lifestyle.
There are many blond young mothers in America who drive nice cars and live lifestyles that they probably value very much. As someone who claims to reject bigotry, your comments were extremely bigoted towards an individual as well as her entire social group, simply because she hinted that she disapproved of you in some way.
You should at least show enough backbone to spell out your profanities, rather than feign sensitivity by censoring yourself with an asterisk. If censoring bad language is an Antiwar.com policy, then perhaps you don't meet the standards of that organization.
Justin Raimondo replies:
You have got to be kidding.
Antiwar.com's webmaster, Eric Garris, replies:
I censor the profanities. Not because I don't care for them, but because we have found that putting certain words on our web pages blocks them from being brought up by computers with "cyber-sitter" type software. This means that virtually no computer in a school library and many public libraries would be able to bring up the article.