>
> > In the scenario that Stephen gave us -- removing the Taliban from power -- that would also result in terrorist strikes against the United States (and Israel, just because).
> >
> > -FP
>
> Israel has, in my opinion, proved that she can defend herself quite nicely against attacks - at least as well as most other countries. In fact, if my patchy memory/education serves me right, Israel has been triumphant every time it has come to brute force. But that's beside the point.

As an aside, but using this paragraph as a subject...

I remember hearing a story about some famous military school, West Point, IIRC. Well, someone asked why they never studied Israel's battles. He was told that, from a human standpoint, they wouldn't have won any of their battles. It basically had to have been the God of Israel.

> The Point (TM) is, I accept your first (or was it last) argument about imposing morals. Fine enough. That could be reason enough to stay out of Afghanistan.
> But I do not accept that you use fear of terrorist strikes on the US (or any western nation openly supporting the action we are discussing, although I'll admit that USA will probably be primary target) as an argument. That is selfish. We are talking about standing up for a principle which is fundamental to our way of life. In fact, several principles. The *only* way human rights have ever progressed is by people standing up for their principles, no matter what the risks for their personal safety were. I think it would be selfish to use that as an argument against action.

Yeah, and as noted before, they'll strike Israel for existing and not being Palestine, and as long as the "Saturday and Sunday people" are still there. So it's not like, by holding back, we're preventing much in that particular theater.

> julian

Nyper"Hineh lo yanum v'lo yishan Shomer Yisrael(Ps. 121:4)"old