The War On Terror
Today, in the letters section of the Star Tribune, there was a letter who's writer said that since Iraq had nothing to do with 9/11, it has nothing to do with the war on terror, and that terrorist-type attacks didn't start until we sent in troops.
What the writer of the letter fails to see is that the war on terror is like the war on drugs, it isn't targetted at one group or individual. It isn't the war against al-Qaeda. or the Taliban. It is against terror, or more accuratly terrorists, and terroristic activities, which means where ever there is terroist activity, we will fight it, until all terrorists are defeated or the anti-war people get their way.
Unfortunatly that is impossible. Even in the sometimes utopian future protraied in Star Trek there are terrorises. The most we can do is eliminate or contain threats as they arise.
"But R.C., What does this have to do with Iraq? Didn't you just say that terrorist attacks didn't start there until the troops arrived?"
Anyone who says that is ignoring the facts. Saddam and his boys were terrorists. I can't think of a better description of someone who would chop (or grind) up a person's body and present it to the deceased's family. Saddam was exicuted due to his involvement in the deaths of hundreds, possibly thousands of men, women, and children. He did it through the use of biological and chemical weapons. He did it through the use of the Iraqi army and extremist groups loyal to him. He might not have pulled the trigger, but he is no less guilty.
And before anyone says anything about Saddam's exicution, hold on for a moment. I plan on posting my thoughts about his exicution, as well as those guys exicuted earlier today.
Some people would point out that Bush has sent in troops, and if Saddam is guilty of killing people using Iraq's army, then so is Bush. The differance is Saddam used his army for revenge and to control, to strike fear into the hearts of the Iraqi people. Bush sent in the troops to take him down.
Like it or not, this is as much a part of the war on terror as the fighting in Afganistan.
What the writer of the letter fails to see is that the war on terror is like the war on drugs, it isn't targetted at one group or individual. It isn't the war against al-Qaeda. or the Taliban. It is against terror, or more accuratly terrorists, and terroristic activities, which means where ever there is terroist activity, we will fight it, until all terrorists are defeated or the anti-war people get their way.
Unfortunatly that is impossible. Even in the sometimes utopian future protraied in Star Trek there are terrorises. The most we can do is eliminate or contain threats as they arise.
"But R.C., What does this have to do with Iraq? Didn't you just say that terrorist attacks didn't start there until the troops arrived?"
Anyone who says that is ignoring the facts. Saddam and his boys were terrorists. I can't think of a better description of someone who would chop (or grind) up a person's body and present it to the deceased's family. Saddam was exicuted due to his involvement in the deaths of hundreds, possibly thousands of men, women, and children. He did it through the use of biological and chemical weapons. He did it through the use of the Iraqi army and extremist groups loyal to him. He might not have pulled the trigger, but he is no less guilty.
And before anyone says anything about Saddam's exicution, hold on for a moment. I plan on posting my thoughts about his exicution, as well as those guys exicuted earlier today.
Some people would point out that Bush has sent in troops, and if Saddam is guilty of killing people using Iraq's army, then so is Bush. The differance is Saddam used his army for revenge and to control, to strike fear into the hearts of the Iraqi people. Bush sent in the troops to take him down.
Like it or not, this is as much a part of the war on terror as the fighting in Afganistan.
posted by R.C. at
5:09 PM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]
<< Home