Declan McCullagh wrote:
The Washington Times ran a stratfor.com article (as a news article, like the paper would run Reuters or AP) yesterday. I haven't visited their website, but what I read yesterday is quite interesting.
-Declan
What I find interesting is how we can have a war without a Congressional declaration, which out of practical if not legal necessity requires something at least approximating a foreign power as the enemy. It would be extremely helpful if there were some overt state action or at least a smoking gun to publicly identify such party. Bin Laden and crew are not a foreign power, unless we are stupid enough to turn them into one, a hostile one. Sheer folly when their precise complicity and the extent of their involvement in the attacks has yet to be demostrated outside of their self-promotion and our desire to find the guilty parties. Who, I don't believe, give a shit about the Islam rampant bs. except as expedient, and as much as about selecting the toll collectors for the pipelines to be built through places like Afghanistan to China, the former Soviet Republics, etc. I don't rule out a war. There are grounds for it. That'll be folly, too, though, if we pick the wrong enemy, or support the wrong side again. Not speaking of Bin Laden now. Or cut another deal with a devil who'll bite us in the ass again a few years down the road. If not sooner. If we have to have Americans dying in remote, already blown-up, mine-laden poppy fields etc. as postulated, kindly let's not do it out of crass political expediency. Again. Nothing wrong with revenge for 5000+ dead, either, but don't let's get more killed going after the wrong motherfuckers, or trying to buy the right ones off. There, is that cryptic enough? jbdigriz