From: Spudboy100@aol.com
Date: Mon Oct 28 2002 - 11:25:13 MST
Dr. Serafino quoting Orianna Falacci:
<The Islamic world is engaged in a cultural war with the West and the worst
is still to come, Italian author Oriana Fallaci told a receptive Washington
audience last night.>
Yes, Professori Serafino,
That is the path America's enemies have indeed chosen, and the firebrand, O.
Falacci has illucidated this. "War you wanted, war you want, war you"ll get
until your last dying breath." This is not the future I want, but it sure
seems it is the future we are getting, through forces not influencible by
American foreign policy. Or what has Bali got to do with anything material?
This war will not end with the Bush Administration. I could see this war
evolving into something like this where the USA performs state terrorism in
response to a WMD attack on NYC. The response might be the leveling on Riyahd
or Mecca by "unclaimed attackers." Similarly, the Russians could respond in
kind to the Chechen terror fiasco of last weekend, with an unconventional
attack on a Chechen city.
On the other hand, I see the impending Bush takeover of Iraq as a
work-around, from depending on Saudi oil. Iraq has almost as much oil and
the world purchasing petroleum from Iraq rather then Saudi would undercut
the Wahabbis capacity to financially support Islamic Jihads. It would also
have a net gain of intimidation of antagonistic Islamic states and the arab
street, to pull in their horns, perhaps.
As an American, I see the toppling of Saddam as a win for the USA's
un-specified war against Islamic Jihadist culture, and the chance to
distribute oil money to the Iraqi people, instead of "palaces" for Saddam's
ego. Now for the downside: there must be a death toll, and the Iraqi people
will suffer terribly, and there is nothing logical we can do about it, except
behave passively. If we behave passively then we will let the Jihadist's
decide when they will strike next.
If I were a Jihadist planner I might attempt two large attacks, perhaps
risking them simmultaneously. One would be a massive attack on electrical
and/or data infrastructure; being energy and banking. The other attack would
be on a vulnerable population center, with its concurrent psychological
shock, and demoralization. The importance of attacking infrastructure was
high-lighted by Professor Peters of the University of Pennnsylvania. Peters
successfully predicted the WTC & DC attacks back in 1998 and attempted to
alert the FAA, in the use of passenger aircraft as guided missles. The FAA
dismissed Peter's warnings as impossible to predict as "meteorite strikes."
Alternatively, we might encounter a type of sporadic high-intensity warfare,
is that such attacks would be separated my months or years, between
successful tries. Consider this a "war of the cities" as happended in the
Iran/Iraq war.
Like I indicated, not the world I want, but the world that seems to be.
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Sat Nov 02 2002 - 09:17:49 MST