From: Samantha Atkins (samantha@objectent.com)
Date: Mon Sep 17 2001 - 14:15:59 MDT
I hate to say this as it can play into some positions which I do
not hold at all. But, it might well be that in terms of
limiting the loss of lives all around, the loss of resources and
having minimal impact on extropy, that a quite tough simple
policy is preferable.
What would be the result of a policy that any attack on US
citizens and assets automatically and without question results
in a large smoldering hole replacing the area the attack seems
to be based from? I would think this would have a quite strong
deterrent effect. Of course that hold doesn't have to be so
large as to include too many innocents. But it does have to be
large enough and guaranteed enough to be a real deterrent.
The alternative of spending billions of dollars and millions of
lives on rooting out all terrorist groups in some 23 countries
seems to me to have a much larger negative impact on all we hold
dear.
- samantha
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Sat Nov 02 2002 - 08:10:46 MST