Tuesday, February 15, 2005
Terrorist: a Word Without a Meaning
In our rush to spend billions of dollars that we don't have (see 2005 proposed Federal Deficit) to defend ourselves from "terrorism," no one has adequately explained to me what this word means that justifies so much additional costs and bureaucracy. In my view of history, there has always been two kinds of bad guys: enemies in war (declared or not) and criminals in peace. But now we are being told there is a third – terrorists. A terrorist is not an enemy, they say, because they don't represent a "state." So does that mean that American or French revolutionaries or the Bolsheviks or Viet Cong were terrorists – I don't think so (at least not for the most part). On the other hand terrorists are supposedly not "just" criminals, because they have a political motivation and they kill civilians indiscriminately. So does this means that the U.S. may have been a terrorist state when we fire bombed Dresden or nuked Hiroshima in World War II – I don't think so. No, the truth is "terrorist" is another manufactured political "buzz" word to scare our money into the hands of bureaucrats. Saddam Hussein, the Ayatollah Khomeini and (the now reformed) Mohomar Khadafi are not terrorists, they are opponents to be destroyed or deposed in war – perhaps even war criminals, if the international courts so find. Al Qaeda and Hezbollah are not terrorists, they are mass murders – common criminals that need to be hunted down and treated as such. Let's do away with the buzz words and keep things simple – it's a lot cheaper!!!
By Ray Darnell at 12:00 AM | Permalink
Category: Homeland Defense
|
Comments (0)
Monday, May 3, 2004
Time to bring back the draft?
Long ago and far away the USA still had this thing called the draft. While most of us who didn't harbor ambitions of becoming career soldiers weren't thrilled about it, there was another thing known as the Vietnam War going on that made troop replacements necessary, even if in relatively modest numbers compared to WWII. Since such large numbers weren't required, a draft "lottery" system was put in place in the late 1960s, with each eligible male (at that time) assigned a number based on the day of his birth. Lower numbers were almost certain to be drafted unless they volunteered first; higher ones started planning the rest of their lives with peace of mind. In the aftermath of Vietnam the draft was abandoned in practice, and the American military went to a completely volunteer system which, to the surprise of many, has worked out well. The caliber of people -- men and women -- now serving voluntarily seems high. Competence and dedication do not seem lacking. What does seem lacking now is volume. The War on Terror with all its global commitments, plus normal demands on our forces, has stretched the U.S. military to what seems dangerously thin levels, particularly when it comes to troops on the ground. National Guard and Reserve forces have been tapped heavily for this war. Where are we going to get more troops if another crisis of similar dimensions arises?
By Robert Parker at 5:54 PM | Permalink
Category: Homeland Defense
|
Comments (2)
