The holiday weekend has given me a chance to, through DVD watching, reinforce the idea that Sports Night is quite possibly the best series to ever be cancelled.
In a war as diffuse and spread out as the current war on terrorism is there really such a thing as an assassination? When there’s no defined fronts what exactly is the difference between an assassination and killed in action? When soldiers aimed at officers in WWII it wasn’t assassination it was disrupting enemy operations. As long as their “generals” don’t come within 10,000 miles of the battle field I see no problem with taking the battle field to them.
You asked me: “Why did [my] son die?” I don’t have a perfect answer to that but I will do my best.
He died at the hands of a murderous group of Islamic fanatics who despise the liberal democratic, open life of Western nations, such as Australia. He died because there are people in the world who believe that indiscriminate violent murder is a justifiable political instrument.
I agree fully with you that Australia did the right thing with its intervention on behalf of East Timor. You will be aware that Osama bin Laden has twice identified that very act of Australia’s as a reason for hostility to our country from his terror network. That surely does not mean that we were wrong to intervene in East Timor.
You are right in saying that boys of your son’s age are always the ones to go to war. It has sadly ever been thus. That is why peaceful resolution of differences should always be sought.
Ignoring terrorism, however, will not make it disappear.
History is strewn with examples of countries not taking a stand on something in the hope that the problem would go away, only to find that, at an infinitely greater cost, that challenge must ultimately be confronted.
Or would “Attack of the clones” have been a better subject? Anyway, an Italian doctor says a cloned baby is due in January.
That’s something you don’t hear very often, especially from someone who voted for Gore.
An interesting theory. And if it were used as a jumping off point for fixing things I might support it, but it looks like it’s mostly being used as an excuse for why blacks fail instead of a reason that can be overcome.
Egypt apparently sees Hamas as an alternative to the Palistinian Authority. I thought the point of finding someone other than Arafat to work with was to find someone who’d listen to common sense and reason, and could control the bombings. While I’ll admit Hamas does the latter they come nowhere near the former.
…and Jacques Chirac reads a magazine. Just imagine the uproar if it had been Bush.
Andrew Sullivan has a good deconstruction of the supposed new Osama letter.