Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.1 6/24/83; site bu-cs.UUCP
Path: utzoo!linus!philabs!cmcl2!seismo!harvard!bu-cs!awc
From: awc@bu-cs.UUCP (Alex Cannon)
Newsgroups: net.flame
Subject: America Strikes Back!
Message-ID: <727@bu-cs.UUCP>
Date: Mon, 14-Oct-85 18:16:31 EDT
Article-I.D.: bu-cs.727
Posted: Mon Oct 14 18:16:31 1985
Date-Received: Thu, 17-Oct-85 07:24:31 EDT
Organization: Boston Univ Comp. Sci.
Lines: 48


The general consensus in the country (and on the net) seems
to be that capturing those terrorists was an action long overdue.
Sure it worked, but stop a minute, and think about the costs;

Egypt is *enraged* that the U.S. hijacked their plane. (For you dictionary
fiends -- hi-jack: "to commandeer a flying airplane (as by coercing the
pilot at gunpoint)" -- yep, hijack). Sure, Egypt is pretty upset that
they're being called for their cowardice in letting the terrorists go
*after* they knew someone had been murdered. Still, they apparently  
did *not* have an under-the-table understanding with the U.S. that
we would hijack the plane to Sicily. That is clearly a crime committed
by the U.S. against Egypt, which has been (til now) less antagonistic 
toward us than the other Arab states.

"Well sure," you say, "but we had to do SOMETHING. The ends justify the
means." Really? After the last terrorist plane hijacking, some of the
folks in the administration were talking about putting contracts out
on each known terrorist. Where do we stop? Do we assemble death squads,
to roam the globe, seeking identified terrorists and killing them?
That surely would get rid of some terrorists, but I don't think it would
deter terrorism any more than the death penalty deters murder in the
United States.

Besides, where would it end? Let's say that commandeering other countries'
aircraft became an accepted anti-terrorist measure. Then, shooting down
planes which resist won't seem so bad (sailors on the Saratoga claim the
jets had orders to shoot if the plane didn't follow instructions). As the
number of terrorist acts committed in *this* country rises, it won't seem
so unreasonable to restrict freedom of travel. Law enforcement agencies
acting "against terrorism" won't need much evidence to get arrest and search
warrants. 

"Bullshit!" you say (you're a feisty one). "That could never happen in 
this country!" Well, I had thought (til recently) that the U.S. would
never start hijacking other countries' aircraft. I'm afraid that the attitude
that we should do it (or allow it) if it works will continue to grow.
The U.S. is starting to resemble its enemies.

We invaded Grenada; that worked. We hijacked a plane. That worked. We lobbed
a tactical nuke at PLO headquarters. That work-- Oops, sorry, that's *next*
week...

Alex Cannon
Boston University

"America First, With No Suppositories"
  -- Famous American A**hole