Current Events — HabitableZone

Current Events » in reply to no, no, no,

re: no, no, no,
Robert — (archived)

I'm sorry for misunderstanding. It seemed like you were playing numbers games, but I missed the more serious point about what might happen after a major attack. Also, I was just coming off my heated response to Tom about preemptive war below, and I think some of that "glow" was suffusing my attitudes.

When I read Franks's comments again, I had this creepy sense that he was describing how the terrorists could win. It's not that he was offerring them a plan, of course, and it's not really a novel concept--martial law would be an automatic reaction of the system--a button they could push. If we don't handle it with the utmost care--and courage--they could win.

The outcome would depend on the interplay between the will of the American people and the strength of its leadership. A weak leader is the biggest danger--somebody who would take the easy path of dictatorship with its seemingly simple solutions. In that event it would be up to the people to compensate through resistance. A very ugly scenario indeed.

Conversely, a truly strong leader could rally the people, help us recover and stand on our own two feet again, and we'd have the shortest period of martial law possible. The stronger the people prove the be the easier it will be.

Working it out that way, it seems like leadership is the critical determinant. Best if we leave for another day taking the next logical step of plugging in individuals into the scenario.

Log in or register to post.

The whole thread (91 posts)