Tuesday, August 17, 2004

pinions of buddy don: fitin a tacktick

when ye thank bout it, this here war on terror we dun gut ourself into is a hard war to fite on a counta how taint agin no cuntry but agin a tacktick. fack is, ye mite could say we hepped the arabs cummence usin this particlar tacktick back in worl war one whenever lawrence of arabia was showin bands of bedouins how to blow up train tracks n other turkish installayshuns. the idee then wuz to keep the turks army spread out, not to fite it direckly, n let the losses drain away thar morale n make supplyin thar folks a lil more difficult.

but gittin sumbidy to use a particlar tacktick depends on whut yer goal is n that will determine yer strategy. a tacktick is jes sumthin to hep yer strategy git ye to yer goal.

so whut we are really a'trine to do is to cunvince folks not to use the tacktick of terror attacks. since thats our own goal, seems lack twood make sense to look at the tackticks n strategy we been a'usin to reach our goal. n to do that, at sum point, ye have to look at what makes folks willin to use a tacktick lack terror. n that means, ye have to ast, whut is thar goal n how duz usin the tacktick of terror hep em reach thar goal?

so far, in my pinion, we aint willin to face inny hard ansers on thatn. mr bush lacks to say they hate folks thats free, but that dont make no sense. why wood i hate folks bein free over in a nuther part of the worl so much that i wood wonta kill em? wood i be trine to make em less free? in that case, woodnt i thank i wuz winnin ifn the cuntry i attacked cummenced to restricktin freedum? ifn we wuz to do that, then the terrsts wood be winnin. so when we make laws to restrick our rights, when we settle fer the idee that tiz ok to lock folks up without due process, that we kin take the wurd of the presdent over the laws by witch our nayhsun wuz founded, meanin that we ackcept rule of men over rule of law, witch that goes agin whut the foundin fathers wuz trine to set up, when we do that, then we are heppin them terrists make us less free.

corse, thats on the assumpshun that hatred of our freedum is whut motivates our enemies to use the tacktick of terror. whut if freedum-hatred wuznt the real goal? whut if they had em a differnt goal that they figgerd they could reach usin a strategy the included the tacktick of terror attacks? ifn we wuz a'gone cunvints em to quit usin it, woodnt we have to unnerstand whut thar real goal wuz?

we know osama bin laden wonted the us outta saudi arabia, so he has dun gut that goal. whut else could it be?

one thang is sartin, based on the histry of folks fitin terror in the past. it caint be dun with force. the main thang terrorism has goin fer it as a tacktick is that it gives the weaker party a way of strikin agin opponents thats much stronger. thats whut the ira used agin the english to grate effeck, even tho the english wuz by far the stronger party. thats whut the basque separtists used agin spain. tiz whut the palestinians uses agin the state of israel. in all three cases, overwhelming force has been used over n over agin, but that dint stop nuthin. thonly one that is stopped at the moment of them three is the english vs the ira, n thatn cum to a end by talkin over thar differntses n cummin to agreement on how to live with em.

we gut ourself in a bind over in iraq on a counta we claim to be attackin the terrists. we dun cum up with all kinda eggscuses bout why this is the rite place to attack em. even so, we find ourself in a spot whar the more force we use, the more folks we cunvints to use terror as a tacktick. the number of insurgents, accordin to a recent report in the ny times (Op-Chart; The State of Iraq: an Update -- no longer available, publised August 10, 2004), is goin up ever day. they estimated at the start that twuznt moren maybe 5,000 but now thar sayin tis easly 20,000. n the same report shows that forn fiters aint all that much of a facter.

seems lack we have to figger whut tiz that they wont ifn we really hope to have a chants to cunvints folks not to use the tacktick of terror. twont be done by shootin folks, bombin em, invadin a cuntry of folks lack em. all of that, as has dun been showed, jes stirs up the hornets nest n cunvintses more folks that terror is thonly tacktick they gut. so they keep on a'usin it n purty soon, folks that woodnt never cunsidder it seems to be gittin in on it.

part of the truble fer us is we are equipped to whup nayshun states in a war, one miltary agin tuthern. but taint a state we gut to go agin. the tackticks ye use fer fitin a state kin make yer war on terror go backwards on a counta how when ye bomb folks n have colaterull damage n all, ye git folks made a nuff to whar they wood blow themselves up jes to git back at ye, speshly in a cultchur known fer blood feuds.

tiz lack one of them chinese fanger puzzles whar the harder ye try to pull it off, the titer it stays on. force wont git yer fanger free.

the histry of the worl shows how force wont cunvints folks to quit a'usin the tacktick of terror. when ye git yer fanger in one of them chinese puzzles, ye larn after a while how ye gut to relax n coax it off. ye caint go strate at it with force.

sadly, the same is true whenever yer trine to git folks to quit usin terror. at sum point, ye gut to evaluate whut the enemy's goal is n how usin the tacktick of terror fits the stategy to achieve them goals. it dont mean ye have to give in, but ye gut to unnerstand.

corse, ye mite be accused of bein sensitive ifn ye do.

No comments: