|
PureBytes Links
Trading Reference Links
|
No, I'm saying that whether they use them or not does not give our military
an excuse to back down. They won't. They have contingency plans. NBC suits,
etc. To many of us the Point man in a tank column is nuts, the firement who
bravely ran up the stairs in the WTC buildings were nuts. But they do it
because it is their job and they are going to do it, and be proud. The point
is, we can't back down.
Jim Bronke
Phoenix, AZ
----- Original Message -----
From: "Mike Higgs" <moongateca@xxxxxxxx>
To: "Jim Bronke" <jvbronke@xxxxxxxx>; "Dean DiCarlo"
<junkmayl@xxxxxxxxxxxx>; <omega-list@xxxxxxxxxx>
Sent: Saturday, September 15, 2001 9:59 PM
Subject: Re: Avoid what Bin Laden wants?
: Jim,
:
: I'm not quite sure what you are saying here when talk about nukes. Are you
: saying that their use doesn't matter because the US Army has been readied
: for them? That because their use in response to US Army action won't slow
: the US Army, it doesn't matter if they are used by a rich Saudi. I am
: confused by your statement about a few nuclear weapons. You seem to be
: saying that a few nukes used by the bad guys wouldn't matter. Before I go
: saying that you are nuts, how about a clarification of exactly what you
are
: saying?
:
: Regards,
: Mike
: ----- Original Message -----
: From: "Jim Bronke" <jvbronke@xxxxxxxx>
: To: "Dean DiCarlo" <junkmayl@xxxxxxxxxxxx>; <omega-list@xxxxxxxxxx>
: Sent: Sunday, September 16, 2001 12:15 AM
: Subject: Re: Avoid what Bin Laden wants?
:
:
: > Let's not get too hysterical here. Our army is actually been readied for
: > nuclear war with Russia. A few nuclear weapons from a Rich Saudi with
cell
: > phone as a battle field communicator is not going to slow them down.
: > Catching him would be good. It is important that we have a trail of
: evidence
: > leading to him. I'm afraid that it won't lead to the end of terrorism.
: > We executed Timothy McVeigh this year and 20 times as many terrorists
have
: > sprung up. Is it going to keep increasing at this pace?
: > We have a free and open society, that's why we are at risk.
: >
: > Jim Bronke
: > Phoenix, AZ
: >
: >
: >
: > ----- Original Message -----
: > From: "Dean DiCarlo" <junkmayl@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
: > To: <omega-list@xxxxxxxxxx>
: > Sent: Saturday, September 15, 2001 9:02 PM
: > Subject: RE: Avoid what Bin Laden wants?
: >
: >
: > : I have been thinking that this may be a trap sprung by bin laden.
There
: > is
: > : not doubt that bin laden does not have the capability to launch nukes
to
: > the
: > : U.S., but does he have access to them? Who knows, but what if this is
a
: > : trap to get a huge part of our armed forces sucked into his land where
: he
: > : can deploy what nukes he may have on a large section of the U.S.
forces?
: > We
: > : alredy know they have enough crazies over there who would be honored
to
: > hit
: > : the tip of a nuke with a hammer just as a group of our marines closes
in
: > on
: > : him...
: > :
: > : This is a VERY scary thought, but how could the U.S. military protect
: > : against it?
: > :
: > : Deano
: > : -----Original Message-----
: > : From: Don Roos [mailto:rosewood@xxxxxxxxxxxxx]
: > : Sent: Saturday, September 15, 2001 8:36 PM
: > : To: omega-list@xxxxxxxxxx; Ullrich Fischer
: > : Subject: Re: Avoid what Bin Laden wants?
: > :
: > :
: > : There will always be serious technical and logistical problems
invading
: > : someone else's country, such as experienced by the Soviet army, but
the
: > : main problem would be that Bin Laden is now thought of as a Robin Hood
: and
: > : is
: > : liked much better than the Taliban by the
: > : population. If we move into a country without means of escape or
: control
: > of
: > : our flanks, to find a moving target, who is worshiped by the populace,
: > what
: > : chance of success do we have? If we were to move into the area in a
: > : stepping stone process of full scale conventional warfare to provide
: > : adequate resupply and protection from flank attack, we would have to
: move
: > : through Pakistan or Iran. They would not be able to stop us, but my
: point
: > : is that Bin Laden has written and stated that his objective
: > : is to get the west to engage in a way that will enrage the 1 billion
: > Islamic
: > : followers to oppose the western Christian "infidels" on their soil,
thus
: > : unifying the Muslim world into one empire again, not seen since the
fall
: > of
: > : Constantinople. Bin Laden wants to be the head of that empire with a
: > puppet
: > : mulla figurehead. Do we want to engage Bin Laden on his terms or
ours?
: > We
: > : need to
: > : evaluate and study what Bin Laden wants, and then come to some
approach
: > : which will go after him on our
: > : terms and time. I do not feel the enraged population will easily
simmer
: > : down and accept some neat cruise missile attacks this time. The
bigger
: > : problem will be not to engage prematurely on Bin Laden's terms.
: > :
: > : Don
: > :
: > :
: > : ----- Original Message -----
: > : From: "Ullrich Fischer" <uf@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
: > : To: "Don Roos" <rosewood@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>; <omega-list@xxxxxxxxxx>
: > : Sent: Saturday, September 15, 2001 9:58 PM
: > : Subject: Re: Avoid what Bin Laden wants?
: > :
: > :
: > : Well said, Don. At the very least, the US will have to bring China
into
: a
: > : military alliance. This may be difficult, but given that China has
: > : suffered from Islamic extremist bombs in some of its northern cities
: over
: > : the last few years, should not be impossible.
: > :
: > : At 9/15/2001 06:45 PM, Don Roos wrote:
: > : >When we think of the fact that an out-of-control war between the west
: and
: > : >the Islamic countries is *exactly* what Bin Laden wants and has
written
: > : >about (and that his aspirations are similar to Hitler's), it is very
: > scary
: > : >to think of the impact upon our sons as well as ourselves of a
: > dictatorial
: > : >leader of an entire 1 billion Islamic people with the extermination
of
: > the
: > : >Jews as well as the entire destruction of modern technological
: Christian
: > : >society as the goals of the dictator (Bin Laden). The challenge we
must
: > : face
: > : >to avoid this trap will be formidible.
: > : >
: > : >The initial trap is the temptation to carpet bomb and try to destroy
an
: > : >already destroyed country, Afghanistan. That is what he wants us to
: do:
: > by
: > : >bombing the widows and orphans of Afghanistan and placing ground
troops
: > : into
: > : >an Islamic country (which will be the only way to get Bin Laden) we
: will
: > : see
: > : >a turn
: > : >of the moderates against us and the polarization of the west against
: the
: > : >Islamic *billion*
: > : >that Bin Laden wants. We could easily find our troops surrounded by
: > : hoardes
: > : >of new anti-crusaders without
: > : >escape.
: > : >
: > : >I do now know what the solution is, but to walk into a Viet Nam trap
: > : >that defeated the awsome Soviet Empire war machine would be
tantamount
: to
: > : >purposefully walking into a trap of worldwide strategic proportions.
: In
: > : >addition, I became aware of the fact only today that Afghanistan
*does*
: > : have
: > : >a border with China. The last times we invaded a country bordering
: China
: > : >were
: > : >in 50's and 60's and they did not produce a good result.
: > : >
: > : >Don
: > :
: > :
: > :
: >
: >
:
|