Quote:
Originally posted by OFKU0
I really don't know if the administration has gone too far or not enough. Have they bitten off more than they can chew? Or did they take small bites instead of big ones? I look at terrorism like lung cancer. If you smoke,you have a better chance of it attacking you than if you don't.
So how does Bush deal with terrorism? Does the U.S let terrorists exist as long as U.S interests are not targeted and take a chance they won't attack ( I can't believe I am even thinking that terrorists might think of the rules of engagement concerning war) or does Bush go hard at every turn knowing as long as the U.S tries to eradicate it, those so inclined will have more reasons to attack?
It's hard to see a win win situation given the context that exists. Maybe something catastrophic like a repeat of Hiroshima or Nagasaki might bring the world back to peace. I hate to think that way but something that rocks the world might be the recipe for a reality. But when does it come back to bite your ass?
|
This is the kind of discussion I was hoping for. Too far, or not far enough. I only hope we know soon.
I hope that nothing catastrophic happens, but sadly you may be correct