Sorry. I hoped no one noticed. But then, who wants to attack the U.S. anyway? I mean; people live here. How can you attack the place without hurting the people? It isn't like they don't love pain. But when they really need pain they have a republican straight ticket, and if it is not time for an election, all they need is a rock and a hammer and a thumb in between, and they are all good.

There is no way for any coalition of countries I can think of to defeat the US militarily on their soil. The US have absolute military dominance over their continent, and the Pacific, and the Atlantic...Can't be done. And the US would use nukes for sure, just a few small ones, please please mr president. We could wipe out a fleet here, an army there...Come to think of it, wouldn't the world be a safer place, nay, a better place, if it consisted only of America? Zap. I'd really not give the crazies the excuse they need to implement the ultimate solution...

Any partially sane leader think of launching nukes would be deterred from doing so once they thought of the consequences of that action. Think about it. If one country nuked another, some other country would nuke that country and a whole chain reaction of nukings would occur until the world and civilization as we know it would crumble. You'd have to be frikkin insane to actually launch nukes.

__________________

Sure; we are strong at the expense of much weakness. People, even Americans, need something to fight for, and we are divided, and without rights or the wealth that comes with rights. Sure, we are strong; but our military can not secure the border, and because the rich open it behind their backs. They have commited the country to have slave labor and drive the price of labor power to the cost of survival. If you cannot prevent an invasion because it occurs one invader at a time what defense would be credible against an invader with harmful intent? In fact, while our rich believe the poor of foreign lands are here to rub their aching feet, they are, in fact, here for their own purposes. They do not need generals to be our enemies. The rich do not need generals to be a disease among us, to exploit us, or to theaten us beyond our safety. Our officer corp may be of the richer class; but our soldiers are of the poor and more desperate among us. The real threat of our army is not to the world, but is to us. The real hope of the people is as thin as water, that when the army is turned against us that they will recognize us as their friends and families.

On the main point of this question let me say: It is non sense to talk of attacking the U.S., or any other country. Armies do not attack countries, but people. We say we attacked Iraq to remove Saddam. We attacked a people in no sense responsible for Saddam, who suffered saddam, and now suffer us and each other. The U.S. is people. Iraq is people. France is people. To attack a country you must kill people. We have to reconsider the idea of attacking people to punish leaders. At a minimum we should weigh the cost in lives against the possibility of gain.

Anyways, my idea for an American Invasion:
Although I am against terrorism and use of it, it is doubtlessly an effective method of creating a sense of panic and hopelessness. An alliance of relatively Anti-American nations such as North Korea, Cuba, Venezuala, and Middle Eastern countries such as Iran, Egypt, Saudi Arabia and others should be formed. Then, the countries in that alliance should seem to come to peace with the US (but not to such an extent that it's suspicious.) Once the US has been enjoying the relative "world peace" for a few years and has let its guard down significantly, the operation can be mobilized. If you could launch terrorist bombings and attacks on multiple major cities across the nation all around the same time, the US wouldn't know what the hell was going on. Right afterward, Cuba and Venezuala could attack strategic targets in the South, North Korea in California and the West, and countries from the Middle East could attack strategic points such as New York, DC, and Baltimore or something in the East. If, by some unimaginable method, the white house or pentagon could be destroyed, that would be a defining moment in the invasion.

The fact that we can sit around and think of stuff like this so easily is really sobering. We take our relative safety everyday for granted most of the time. Remember 9/11? (Dumb Question I Know.) Imagine that, but on cities across the nation. I wouldn't know what the hell to do.

__________________

II, you think in such conventional terms. If this country must support a vast and expensive military it is already an attack upon us from within. To attack us is not to attack our strength, but our weakness. If they want to beat us, they should hit us where we ain't. They should attack our morality and our economy where we can least defend it. Conquerors have a moral advantage, which captialism denies to us. Those who give to the third world all of our ability to produce the goods we once sold to them inevitably weaken the capitalism we think is our strength. If we sell our garbage to China, and they sell it back to us as children's chew toys who benefits on our end? The capitalist will sell the rope he will be hanged with, and international trade is such a rope. Those who think their future hangs on it is right. We have to export what people actually want, and it cannot be all military and violence. We have plundered the world to enjoy its fruits. When we can no longer do so without prohibitive costs then the exploitation visited upon others for so long will be turned upon us. And, the markets we once found abroad will have to be found in this land, so that the capitalist shell game will be revealed a fraud.

Capitalists think capitalism is our strength. It is our weakness. It requires too much energy, foreign markets, and an excess of law and military force to maintain. Markets are our Achiles heel. When we convince every Muslim to buy from some where else, or to do without, our defeat will be assured. An attack upon us does not require overt violence. It only requires a simple observation, that our government does not have enough military to make people buy American at the point of a gun. We cannot defend our capital or manufacturing on foreign shores. If that falls we will look around and find we are another third world country without any moral superiority at all.

Quite true, but that method would take a lot of time and a lot of cooperation among countries not typically willing to cooperate with one another, even against America. America, like all powers have in the past, will one day crumble, and it's economic destruction could very well be the cause of it.

__________________

This country lives quarter to quarter. Some people think in terms of lifetimes, or centuries. Do you believe that 911 was not some sort of reprisal for centuries of humiliation of Islam? The cooperation of enemies does not have to be significant. The rot within only has to meet the hatred without. Remember that Rome and Greece and Carthage and Eqypt and the Catholic church caved in when they fell. No country can have any strength while it feeds on its own citizens. We have chosen a class divided society and condemed ourselves to weakness and destruction. In the 14th century Ibn Khaldun, the great philosopher historian of Islam correctly charted the rise and fall of all empires from invasion to disolution, weakness, injustice, and destruction. The names and the circumstances change. The changes are in incidentals, but not in essence. When a society does not grasp the key to its strength it will feed its weaknesses until its life dies. If that society cannot rejuvinate itself with revolution it will be swept away by invasion.

George W. Bush has started America's decline. Installing him in the White House, and others like him, has caused America far more damage than the attack on the WTC.

Self inflicted damage ? They ought to make a movie. 'The Texan Candidate'.

like the attack in 93?

__________________

"The captain has turned off the `No Dubbing' sign. You are free to speak any language you choose."

Bis interimitur qui suis armis perit...

George Bush is not the beginning or end of anything. This country began to rot when ripe. Our flag ought to be the Jolly Roger, and our motto should be: We want it and we'll take it. No country has ever gotten more distance out of a gallon of hype and a pack of lies. I will agree that when, as a class, that the capitalist can be so confident of their continued ascendancy as to put up a moron for president, a man with complete want of education, and a contempt for it, then they are in more trouble than they realize. But damage is a matter of opinion. Until their insults turn to a complete rejection of trade with the U.S., which will never happen until our money turns to shiit, then they can have their damage. The weakness of capitalism is what they think of as a strength, and that is the world economy. When you need an army spanning the globe to protect your trade you have to have a tremendous level of trade to pay the cost of the military. Democracy is primarily defensive, and best at defense. Capitalism is offensive and best at offense. At some point the contradictions between capitalism and democracy will become clear to all.

Americans, I don't believe, will ever willingly accept Socialism or whatever alternative to Capitalism because of the bad name our country has given it through propaganda. Most of America doesn't even know what Capitalism means. Most of those that do just know it's how they stay rich without doing anything, so they like it. But lets get back to attacking-the-US ideas.

__________________

We are making progress really. I am talking about the attacking the U.S. idea. We are a nation unless we are not. A nation is one people. Tough though it is to call us that since we have so little in common; but if we are to be a nation we must have something in common besides mutual animosity. The way to attack our nation is to attack our unity, our cohesion, what Ibn Khaldun called: Asabiya (soliderity). Nothing attacks our solderity better than to allow and to give legal support to the exploitation of mankind by man. For the strength of a nation, where is the strength in a handful of kings lording over a multitude of serfs. Where is the strength in those who own the bulk of the property denying all financial responsibility for the decisions made in their behalf? We are hollowed out as a country. We have no financial depth. The working class has been plundered of its rights, its government, its property and its future. The misery is palpable. The pain is tangeable. Look at this little piss ant conflict we are engaged in. The losses are insignificant compared to our past conflicts, but you take so much from a man when you take a man's life, and that is his sole wealth. If I were to attack this country, this nation, with a plague, and a fire, and a vengeance; I would set loose the capitalist class to feed upon the life in them, and to steal their lives by the minute.

I'd make America into a completely free market economy. Then let the masses revolt once they find out how flawed the system they support is.

__________________

I wouldn't ever count on good coming from evil. Nor would I attack evil with evil. And the masses are revolting enough with the problems they have. Jefferson said it well about people holding to old forms and suffering evils while they are sufferable. Never underestimate the ability of people to figure things out without the destructions. This society will teach us to live together or teach us to tear each others hearts out. I am holding out for number one.