Holy John
Acrobat
Here is a couple of questions :
I - What do you think about the attacks in New York and Washington D.C. ?
2 - Do you support American President, Mr. George W. Bush, in his apparent good-feelings into what seems to be a large-scale "traditional" war ? (I said traditional only to image the war with earth-air-sea attacks kind of war, with an army instead of a "silent" war with commandos)
3 - Is is a US Army problem or a NATO problem ?
4 - Would you go at war if NATO declares it ?
-----
Here are my answers. It would be interesting for all of you to answer that.
I - I don't support the terrorist actions. I believe any attacks against civilians, would it be in a war or in terror attacks, are of any good.
2 - I don't support Mr. Bush in his apparent-thinking of launching into a large-scale traditional war. This is all suppositions, but I wouldn't approve that action. It is understandable that he and the American people want to venge their lost ones, but war won't do anything good. On the other hand, if he means "war against terrorism", that, I think everybody approves it in here.
I believe the responsibles should be taken into International Justice Court, since it's an international affaire I believe (because of the organization of terrorism, not because an attack on "democracy and freedom"). Also, the United Nations should have a well-followed-with-guts plan against terrorism. But you must know that ending terrorism will also mean to understand the whys of the attacks, more than the whos. Why did the terrorist attacked the US and why do they hate the US.
3 - If there is a war, it should be a US military one.
4 - I wouldn't go fight for "another country". If that would happened in Montreal, my feelings probably would be different, but my feelings now are that peace and specific actions against terrorism should prevail. The terrorist certainly excepcted a strong action from the US and that's what they wanted to do.
cheers
------------------
La resignacion es un suicido permanente
I - What do you think about the attacks in New York and Washington D.C. ?
2 - Do you support American President, Mr. George W. Bush, in his apparent good-feelings into what seems to be a large-scale "traditional" war ? (I said traditional only to image the war with earth-air-sea attacks kind of war, with an army instead of a "silent" war with commandos)
3 - Is is a US Army problem or a NATO problem ?
4 - Would you go at war if NATO declares it ?
-----
Here are my answers. It would be interesting for all of you to answer that.
I - I don't support the terrorist actions. I believe any attacks against civilians, would it be in a war or in terror attacks, are of any good.
2 - I don't support Mr. Bush in his apparent-thinking of launching into a large-scale traditional war. This is all suppositions, but I wouldn't approve that action. It is understandable that he and the American people want to venge their lost ones, but war won't do anything good. On the other hand, if he means "war against terrorism", that, I think everybody approves it in here.
I believe the responsibles should be taken into International Justice Court, since it's an international affaire I believe (because of the organization of terrorism, not because an attack on "democracy and freedom"). Also, the United Nations should have a well-followed-with-guts plan against terrorism. But you must know that ending terrorism will also mean to understand the whys of the attacks, more than the whos. Why did the terrorist attacked the US and why do they hate the US.
3 - If there is a war, it should be a US military one.
4 - I wouldn't go fight for "another country". If that would happened in Montreal, my feelings probably would be different, but my feelings now are that peace and specific actions against terrorism should prevail. The terrorist certainly excepcted a strong action from the US and that's what they wanted to do.
cheers
------------------
La resignacion es un suicido permanente