In article >,
Omelet > wrote:
> In article >,
> Waldo Centini > wrote:
>
> > Op Tue, 14 Oct 2008 10:27:34 -0500 Omelet illuminated the masses with
> > this:
> >
> > >> Terrorists are human too.
> > >
> > > No, they are NOT.
> >
> > Then what are they? Animal, vegetable or mineral, gi's a clue!
>
> Sub-human.
>
> The dregs of civilized society.
Of course, I'm not going to try to justify what the terrorists have done.
But let's go back a few hundred years, when what is now the US decided
that they no longer wanted to be a colony of England. England sent over
mercenaries, as they were busy fighting on other fronts. The
mercenaries wore bright red uniforms, an easy target. They stood in
neat rows and fired on command. It was pretty easy to hide behind a
tree when it was time to be fired upon. Then, while the mercenaries
reloaded, all at once, with no method of defense, it was easy to pick
them off at will. I'm sure the mercenaries considered the colonists to
be terrorists. They refused to fight according to the usual rules of
combat. They refused to wear uniforms. I'm sure there were lots of
young boys out hunting squirrels for dinner who were killed by the
mercenaries. That didn't create any good feelings towards England.
OK, now let's try Vietnam. Now *we* were the troops, in uniform,
fighting in another country against the inhabitants of that country. A
US soldier could buy some food from a villager, then turn his back only
to get a knife in the back. It was difficult to tell friend from foe.
We were supporting a corrupt dictator, so there was a good chance that
many of the people in South Vietnam weren't very supportive of our
attempt to "fight communism". In particular, there was the village of
My Lai. US troops entered the village, and lined all of the inhabitants
up. They were all unarmed. The US troops then shot all of them, men,
women and children. Every single one. Then they burned down the whole
village. When asked why they did that, the reply was that they had to
destroy it in order to save it. Is that terrorism or what? Perhaps the
inhabitants of My Lai were feeding the Viet Cong. I guess after that,
villages would be less willing (or more secretive) to feed or provide
supplies to the Viet Cong.
--
Dan Abel
Petaluma, California USA