Fair Fight?

[gilliam]

I disagree with Cliff May here, but the arguement is strong:

In a conventional war, if one side has tanks, fighter jets, submarines and similar weapons, while the other side does not, who wins? The answer is obvious.

In an unconventional war, if one side has suicide bombers, license to kidnap, torture and violate the laws of war while the other side must refrain from deploying such weapons and abide by all the rules, who wins? The answer, I’m afraid, may be equally obvious.

Cliff May’s Scripps Howard column on this theme is here

 

[mjdonnelly]

Very good article, this portion is particularly interesting:

But, on the contrary, the trend has been to legitimize the tactics used against the West and indulge those employing them. Mass murdering civilians, torching churches and even mosques do not spark major protests anywhere. Nor has there been serious action in response from the United Nations, the international courts and prominent human rights organizations.

 

[Ani_Ibi]

The most effective strategy and tactics wins.

Look at the strategy of Al Queda. Initially it is glamorous; as it progresses, it becomes obvious that it excludes from power and benefits those upon whom it depends to prosecute the war. People get pigged off, exhausted from empty promises.

The strategy of the Coalition, on the other hand, is to increase the power and the benefits to those upon whom it depends to prosecute the war. Schools, elections, infrastructure, food, shelter, jobs go a long long long way. All the anti-American spindoctoring in the world will not stop the onslaught of economic prosperity and socio-political viability.

Compare the tactics. Al Queda’s tactics create the most collateral damage. The Coalition’s tactics create the least collateral damage. Anti-American spindoctoring does not change basic mathematics. People can do the math.

 

[mjdonnelly]

Ani Ibi:

Compare the tactics. Al Queda’s tactics create the most collateral damage. The Coalition’s tactics create the least collateral damage. Anti-American spindoctoring does not change basic mathematics. People can do the math.

You mean they should be able to do the math. You give people too much credit.

 

[Ani_Ibi]

mjdonnelly:

You mean they should be able to do the math. You give people too much credit.

Are you suggesting that given the choice between blowing one’s children up and holding down a regular job with a regular salary; the choice between watching one’s grandchild die of advanced cancer and being able to take him to a hospital to save his life; the choice between continuing to endure chaos, oppression, violence and being able to take one’s family to the ice cream store to celebrate the end of Ramadan: sane, rational, God-fearing people will choose an irrational, self-contradictory, bleak polemic which serves no one but those who clutch billions of illegally begotten money and resources to their breasts? They will choose this to their immediate harm and to the immediate harm of their children and to the long-term hopelessness of their descendants?

Well, perhaps. Not everyone will choose reason and faith. Some will choose reason and faith. That is what I hold out. Reason and faith makes me accountable. That reason, faith, and accountability is what people see in me. On a person to person basis, that is the very best I can do.

I am not a statesperson, a military commander, a journalist. I am just an ordinary citizen with a job and a neighbourhood and a Church. I can only work on a person-to-person basis.

I feel that I do not have the luxury of cynicism.