posted on Nov, 12 2006 @ 11:58 AM
Very thought provoking questions.
I hope you get some responses that are thought out and not just gut reactions.
I seem to recall a story not too long ago about a guy in New York that got arrested for terrorism because he was rebroadcasting some contraversial
Im sorry buy my details are a bit foggy, I just remember the gist of the story being that he was airing something that the CIA or FBI considered
subversive. That kinda relates to this story IMO.
My response to your first question would be that if this were to occur in the post 9-11 USA that the 'terrorists' would probably be detained,
rendered, and waterboarded into confessing any number of potential crimes.
Sad comment I know, but what do you expect out of a nation that once called itself the 'home of the brave' and now has a phobia of bearded men in
foreign lands chanting anti-western rehtoric. Classic double-think.
Im sure you have seen the stickers somewhere that say "NO FEAR!" but you probably never noticed the fine print at the bottom which reads (except
bearded men in foreign lands)
My response to your second question would be to use the present neocon thought process and say that if Vietnam was more mighty than the USA it would
not only have the right but the duty to invade and occupy in order to secure its future. I believe the thought is to nip it in the bud before it
becomes a big problem.
So yes, if Vietnam was bigger and stronger than us it would justify them invading us.
Of course that is not how I personally feel, I dont think Vietnam would be justified in invading us because the so called 'terrorist' group was in
the USA. I think that the 'terror camp' scenario is a very flimsy reason to invade anybody.
Again, nice thought provoking questions! Help deny double-think!