A Usenet persona calling itself BCITORGB wrote:

TnT said:
==============
But I also know that some bearded warlord in Afganistan does affect us
as well. I suspect that was part of the biggest shock to many Americans
on 9/11. Our bubble burst. We all live in a world where we affect one
another.
=================

I don't mean to appear callous, but I think part of the problem lies
with a nation that has lived virtually untouched by the reast of the
world for 2 centuries. A nation that could afford to practice
isolationist policies. When your "bubble burst", you couldn't believe
it. And you likely over-reacted (see other posts putting the
casualities into perspective -- and I truly mean no disrespect to the
innocent victims of the bearded warlord).

I must agree here. After visiting Europe in the 80's, where terrorists have
been blowing people up for a long time, I concluded that we were abysmally
ignorant of the terrorist threat. I always knew that there would be some
horrific terrorist attack that would finally wake Americans up.


Other nations, not isolated from neighbors by a huge ocean, better
understand the interconnectedness. By all means, go after the warlord
(as you know, most other nations supported you in those efforts). But
don't try to con the world into believing that a secular dictator has
anything in common with a religious fundamentalist (in this case, I'm
referring to Osama) who despises secularism.

Except that Saddam did have a lot in common with Osama. The most important
thing they have in common is Islam. The next most important thing they have
in common is a hatred of America.

The proof of complicity between Osama and Saddam continues to pour in. The
UN Oil-for-Food program did little more than fund international terrorism
because Saddam diverted the funds into tens of thousands of secret bank
accounts across the world and gave terrorists access to those funds.

That, and WMD were thinly
veiled excuses to gain control of oil.

Not true, but even it it were true, so what? Oil is a strategic resource.
Every nation on the planet wants to secure strategic resources for its own
use. That's the nature of nations. That's the history of the planet. Why
should we apologize for deposing a brutal dictator (which was the prime
reason) who violated the cease-fire agreement (a secondary reason) and was
known, absolutely and without doubt to have had, and used WMD's (a secondary
reason) which will also result, we hope, in a nation friendly to us and our
strategic needs?


TnT says:
===============
That does not mean that we should just go along with the other parts of
the world, but that we should attempt to influence them with what we
believe.
==================

That's a tad arrogant, don't you think?

No. It's beneficial to world peace.

When should I expect American
troops strolling down my boulevard and knocking on my door so as to
"influence" me to "believe" in the American dream?

Don't know. Where do you llive? I'll look it up on the invasion schedule.

Then again, I think that our agents-in-place, code-named "McDonalds,"
"Burger King," and "Wal-Mart" are doing a fine job of subverting your
regime.

--
Regards,
Scott Weiser

"I love the Internet, I no longer have to depend on
friends, family and co-workers, I can annoy people WORLDWIDE!" TM

© 2005 Scott Weiser