On 2004-07-05T21:32:16+0200, Anonymous wrote:
Major Variola (ret) writes:
The yanks did not wear regular uniforms and did not march in rows in open fields like Gentlemen. Asymmetric warfare means not playing by *their* rules.
But asymm warfare has to accomplish its goal. It's not being very successful. The only people who are siding with al-qaeda are those whose brains are already mush -statist socialists, to be precise. If al qaeda
Who cares who sides with Al Qaeda? They're not keeping track of their sympathizers. It's foreign policy change, social change ("reform" perhaps?), and volunteers for martyrdom they want, not rhetorical support.
bombed government buildings or targetted the private residences or offices of government officials, they might get more sympathy, from me at least.
The WTC and the pentagon were specific, well-thought-out targets. The plane that crashed in PA was headed to the Capitol. If you're so eager to see Al Qaeda blow up better targets, why not suggest a few?
Destroying an pair of buildings and killing thousands of citizens -most of whom couldn't give an accurate account of U.S. forces distribution in the MidEast- is not a step forward.
As everyone else pointed out, Even though the 9/11 attacks may not have garnered your support, it accomplished other objectives.