>
> Right. And if I punch you, you'll punch me back, and then I'll punch you again, and so on and so on, until we're both reduced to quivering lumps of jelly. You're taking things to illogical extremes and doing yourself a disservice by actually believing this is a valid extension of what I said.
>
> The TRUTH is, if I punch you, then you punch me back, and we trade blows, at some point one of us is going to cry uncle. It's not going to GET as far as you seem to think it will, because one of us will give up long before that point is reached.
>


Maybe. At least as likely, if you punch me, and I punch you, all your friends will come rushing to punch me, at which point I'll either be overcome or "rescued" by all my friends. Regardless of how such a punchout will end *, everyone will be able to blame the other side, and hey presto, a feud is what you have started.


> THAT is what I'm saying. If country A is harboring known terrorists, we say "Give them to us, so that we may put them on trial" or "Put them in prison so that they may not commit these crimes any longer." If they won't, we strike at their military and industrial centers until they reconsider.


One additional step: They say "Give us proof that this man did it", you say "OK, here you go".

THAT is the way to go. No other.

julian

* assuming that there is no police or other impartial authority to restore the order