On Mon, 14 Apr 2008 12:55:44 -0400, with neither quill nor qualm, "Ed
Huntress" quickly quoth:


"Bill" wrote in message
How in your view is stopping them before they come over here and blow up
more stuff and kill more civilians a lack of depth in strategy?? If
someone tells me that they are going to kill my family and blow up my
house
I'm not going to wait until it happens, I'm going to make sure one way or
another it CAN'T happen.

Because there's nothing stopping them *now* from coming over here and
blowing up more stuff. And there are fewer trained people here now to stop
them. Our defensive resources are busy, over there.

What? You feel that our highly trained airport goons aren't any good?
That our holey border fences north and south won't stop the tangoes?


Bill, the whole idea that we're "stopping them" over there, so they won't
come over here, may be the stupidist strategy idea in the history of the US.
The people we're stopping "over there" aren't the same people who would come
over here, in the first place. Fighting them over there just increases their
incentive to strike over here.

Ironic, ain't it?


And we're wasting our resources fighting
thousands of them over there, when what we really need to do is to protect
against perhaps dozens of them attacking over here. See 9/11 for reference.

Awww, you were doing so well, too, Ed. The glitch is that we cannot
protect ourselves or our country from terrorist attacks, period. We
can catch several (maybe even most) attempts, but we can't get all of
them. And that included both foreign and domestic terrorists. You or
anyone you know (or don't know) could cause any one of hundreds of
terrorist acts and nobody would be the wiser until it was over.
That's its beauty (when our military needs it) and terror (when they
do it to us.)

--
It is better to wear out than to rust out.
-- Bishop Richard Cumberland