Return-Path: <sentto-279987-2050-1000868222-fc=all.net@returns.onelist.com> Delivered-To: fc@all.net Received: from 204.181.12.215 by localhost with POP3 (fetchmail-5.1.0) for fc@localhost (single-drop); Tue, 18 Sep 2001 19:59:11 -0700 (PDT) Received: (qmail 24873 invoked by uid 510); 19 Sep 2001 02:57:27 -0000 Received: from n18.groups.yahoo.com (216.115.96.68) by 204.181.12.215 with SMTP; 19 Sep 2001 02:57:27 -0000 X-eGroups-Return: sentto-279987-2050-1000868222-fc=all.net@returns.onelist.com Received: from [10.1.4.54] by mr.egroups.com with NNFMP; 19 Sep 2001 02:57:02 -0000 X-Sender: ozair_rasheed@geocities.com X-Apparently-To: iwar@yahoogroups.com Received: (EGP: mail-7_3_2_2); 19 Sep 2001 02:57:01 -0000 Received: (qmail 11229 invoked from network); 19 Sep 2001 02:57:01 -0000 Received: from unknown (10.1.10.142) by l8.egroups.com with QMQP; 19 Sep 2001 02:57:01 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO isb.pol.com.pk) (216.252.186.212) by mta3 with SMTP; 19 Sep 2001 02:56:57 -0000 Received: from Ozair (pakistan-online-isb-64-110-95-14-v90port-14.pol.com.pk [64.110.95.14]) by isb.pol.com.pk (8.11.3/8.11.3) with ESMTP id f8J2uPg19725 for <iwar@yahoogroups.com>; Wed, 19 Sep 2001 07:56:25 +0500 To: "Info War" <iwar@yahoogroups.com> Message-ID: <000001c140b8$4915a540$6301a8c0@Ozair> X-Priority: 3 (Normal) X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook, Build 10.0.2616 Importance: Normal In-Reply-To: <200109190218.TAA16856@big.all.net> X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4522.1200 From: "Mohammad Ozair Rasheed" <ozair_rasheed@geocities.com> Mailing-List: list iwar@yahoogroups.com; contact iwar-owner@yahoogroups.com Delivered-To: mailing list iwar@yahoogroups.com Precedence: bulk List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:iwar-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com> Date: Wed, 19 Sep 2001 08:07:55 +0500 Reply-To: iwar@yahoogroups.com Subject: RE: [iwar] [fc:SEPTEMBER.11,.2001:.TEN.WAYS.TO.LOOK.AT.WHAT.HAPPENED.AND.WHAT.TO.EXPECT] Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit My comments in line. I would welcome some other perspective/comments. Regards, Ozair -----Original Message----- From: Fred Cohen [mailto:fc@all.net] Sent: Wednesday, September 19, 2001 7:19 AM To: Information Warfare Mailing List Subject: [iwar] [fc:SEPTEMBER.11,.2001:.TEN.WAYS.TO.LOOK.AT.WHAT.HAPPENED.AND.WHAT.TO.EX PECT] As the nation -- or nations, since some 40 countries lost citizens in the New York City attacks -- recovers from the immediate shock and outrage over the events of September 11, it is necessary to understand the phenomenon that led to the atrocities, lest our response be incomplete or misguided. 1. This is not a war between the West and Islam but between the West and a large segment of the Islamic world, the fundamentalist minority. For the fundamentalists, the problem is not U.S. policy toward Israel, the Gulf, or anywhere else, the problem is the United States itself -- not what we do, but who we are. [Ozair] It appears that the write is too much engrossed in the concept that this has something to do with the US being itself. I am not sure if his assertions are right. How can the large segment of Islamic world be a minority? Essentially he is inciting hatred against Islam. 2. While Arab leaders and our own leaders are right to admonish us to avoid confusing Muslims with terrorists, the fact is there are no known cases of contemporary mass terrorism in the name of Judaism, Christianity, Confucianism, Buddhism, or Hinduism. There thus appears to be something in Islam that allows the likes of the Taliban or bin Laden to thrive. Only the Muslims themselves can root it out. What America needs from the Islamic world far more than military or political support is for Muslims themselves -- from the smallest mosques in New York City, Peshawar, or Hamburg to the largest in Mecca -- to read the fundamentalists out of Islam. In the long run, the most effective counter-terrorist force -- potentially -- is Muslims who proclaim that terrorism is anti-Islamic. [Ozair] I'd like to contradict the writer here. There are cases in the history whereby the Judaism and Christianity participated in the mass terrorism, crusades for one was the case in Christian History, Conquest of Andalusia was another. On contemporary level, the Israeli atrocities against Palestinians, the Serbian mass atrocities/terror mongering against Bosnia. 3. It is said that Pakistani President Musharaf sees Mustafa Kemal "Ataturk," the builder of modern Turkey, as his model. Let us hope that is true, and that more Muslim leaders see Ataturk as a model. For Turkey alone in the Middle East has succeeded in demonstrating that Islam and Western political values are not incompatible. It is ironic, in this respect, that our European friends often think that Ankara's crackdown on Islamic fundamentalism is an infringement on human rights. [Ozair] No Comments. 4. Speaking of our European friends, their expressions of solidarity cannot help but move us all. Let us hope, however, that we don't find ourselves debilitated by unrelenting objections over strategy and tactics, or, even worse, the attempt to solve the "root causes" of terrorism - - the surest path to retreat. It was not a European, however, but a prominent American professor at MIT, Noam Chomsky, who interpreted the events of September 11 as "an atrocity answering American atrocities." [Ozair] No Comments. 5. There are innumerable Islamic terrorist cells throughout Western Europe taking advantage, as they do in the United States, of democracy's openness. When we hear that some Islamic leaders in England or Germany still preach support for the perpetrators of the crimes in New York, Washington and Pennsylvania -- and do so publicly -- one has to wonder. When dozens, or hundreds, of Islamic terrorists indicted or even sentenced for crimes in Egypt, Algeria, Morocco, Turkey and so on are still being given asylum in Western Europe, one has to question how serious our allies are. What we need to know from the Europeans is whether they are in this for the long haul and whether they are prepared to take stiff measures to stem the terrorist threat. Judging from the European press, not all the signs are encouraging, for the Atlantic may be wider than we thought. [Ozair] No Comments, but I guess Britain is very supportive of US. 6. President Bush has described the terrorist attack and its aftermath as "a different kind" of war. How "different" is it? To begin with, it is a protracted conflict in which the distinction between domestic and foreign, police and military, can no longer be made. It is a seamless conflict in which the link between the internal and international operations has a clear name -- intelligence. Indeed, in the long run, the most important and decisive role is going to be played not by the military but by institutions that Western democracies do not normally see as associated with war: police and intelligence. The U.S. and allied militaries obviously have an important role in the short term, but ultimately this is a war to be won or lost on the streets of New York, London, Hamburg and Paris, by innumerable policemen and plainclothes FBI and other security personnel, as well as by plainclothes men of the Jordanian, Egyptian, and Algerian secret services. [Ozair] I am not sure if the perspective is right over here, no doubt terrorism is the worst kind of warfare, however, you have to realize that even countries also take part in terrorism, namely the incidents between Palestinians and Israelis, Russia and Chechnya. 7. Legislation has to be dramatically changed in Washington as well as Ottawa, Brussels, Strasbourg, and all the EU member states. If this war is to be won, the European obsession with American death penalty legislation has to give way to higher priorities, such as extraditing or putting down terrorists for good. The politically correct campaign in Europe and the United States against "racial profiling" has to stop: after all, looking for tall, blond and blue-eyed persons in order to stop Middle Eastern terrorism makes no sense. [Ozair] No Comments. 8. The terrorists of New York have many potential allies in the anti-globalization movement who share anti-capitalist, anti-democratic, and anti-Western ideas. It is not that the "anti-globalists" are terrorists, or even support them, but they will likely oppose the tough anti-terrorist measures that are required to meet the threat. [Ozair] A lot of 'may-be'. Maybe the writer was dreaming all this. 9. In the short run, the military questions most often mentioned are targeting, logistics, and numbers. The targets could be limited, at least initially, to the Taliban and Osama bin Laden leadership. One has to remember that many, probably most Afghans, are at least tired of, if not hostile to, the Taliban rule. The notion that myriads of Afghans, plus some refugees in camps in Iran or Pakistan, would join the "jihad" requested by the Taliban is probably nonsense; it may well be a call to war few would rally around. Logistically, Pakistan, Russia, and Russia's protectorates in Central Asia (all of whom are Turkic speakers) are the keys for a ground operation. That operation has to be short, sharp, and effective. At the same time, we must get out the word to the Afghan people that the Taliban rulers and their criminal guests are the enemy, not the Afghans themselves. Many Afghans would cooperate with the U.S. if that understanding is clear in their own minds, and if the idea of an American occupation of Afghanistan is dispelled beforehand. [Ozair] It is most certain that the writer is stating things without facts, using words like 'Probably' before an assertion makes people believe what the writer wants them to but leaves the writer safe from all responsibility. This point can also be translated as, if required the targets could be expanded to include even sympathizers of such people? I am sure that this is suggesting an action without forethought, a complete and total reflex action. 10. Ultimately, this is a protracted conflict, to be won by Western police, intelligence, and military forces, with the vital support of Muslim intelligence resources. It is not, as I said earlier, a war between Islam and the West, though irrationality and fear could make it so. And, whether we like it or not, the map of the Islamic world is going to be different from what it is today -- politically and culturally. [Ozair] Here is an assumption that Western police shall win this conflict. This is not certain that it is a winnable war. My question is why get into the conflict that cannot be won. Point number 10 negates the point number 9, short, sharp, effective is a direct converse of protracted. This said, we should not forget that international terrorism is not limited to Islamist fanatics, even if they are the most numerous, best organized, and widespread. There are still the Basque Euskadi ta Askatsuna (ETA), the Irish Republican Army, and the Tamil Tigers lurking in the shadows, planning murder and mayhem in many countries, and receiving support from many more. They are part of the enemy in this war. [Ozair] :) The author says all things against Islam (points 1-10 and the preamble), yet in his closing paragraph denies saying anything against it, this is funny. ------------------ http://all.net/ Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/ ------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor ---------------------~--> Secure your servers with 128-bit SSL encryption! Grab your copy of VeriSign's FREE Guide: "Securing Your Web Site for Business." Get it Now! http://us.click.yahoo.com/4mr93B/zhwCAA/yigFAA/kgFolB/TM ---------------------------------------------------------------------~-> ------------------ http://all.net/ Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.2 : 2001-09-29 21:08:45 PDT