Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!burl!ulysses!bellcore!decvax!ittatc!dcdwest!sdcsvax!sdcrdcf!hplabs!hpda!hpisoa2!hpitg!spar!singer@spar
From: singer@spar
Newsgroups: net.followup
Subject: Re: Re: Air raid on Libya
Message-ID: <234@spar>
Date: Tue, 29-Apr-86 23:31:00 EDT
Article-I.D.: spar.234
Posted: Tue Apr 29 23:31:00 1986
Date-Received: Sun, 11-May-86 16:16:16 EDT
References: <720@ark>
Lines: 31

As far as I can see, there are two man aims in terrorism:  applying
pressure to get a definite end (e.g. taking hostages to get release of
'political' prisoners);  and as a means of protest.  To solve the problems
of international terrorism, one needs to thwart the aims.  The first
kind of aim is easily thwarted;  simply don't yield to terrorist demands -
this is being and has been done successfully.  The second is more difficult;
one both needs to remove the need or desire for protest, and also remove
the efficacy of it.  Now it seems to me that bombing Libya both increases
the desire for protest, and publicizes and exposes international terrorism
in a way which gives it an impression of power, scale, and importance which
is way out of proportion.  Terrorists are now viewed (and view themselves)
as major players on the international stage, to a great extent thanks to
TV, newspapers, and the over-reactions of politicians.  I am bitterly
opposed to all forms of violence (individual acts of terrorism, and
acts of war), but it also seems to me that international terrorism is not,
in fact, a major problem -- measured by death rate, or successful coercion,
or in any other way.  So I support the earlier posting -- resolve the
political tensions in the area as far as possible, become an active player
in the area for peaceful solutions, try to woo countries into friendship
rather than bomb them into submission, and stop aggrandizing petty terrorists.
To a large extent the hatred in the area that exists for western countries
is a direct result of the inept, heavy-handed and inconsiderate way they
have behaved in the area in the past hundred years or so.  I have no sympathy
for Kadafi, but to some extent he is as much a symptom of a problem as a
problem in himself, and no matter how satisfying it is to slap his hand it
won't solve the problem of Libya, Iran, or Syria.  To repeat an earlier
posting -- Ask:  Where do we want to be?  How do we get there?

I realize that long-term policies of this nature are hopelessly unsuccessful
at aggrandizing politicians, and that policies which pay off in ten or
twenty years are useless for the next election ...