Hi Len,

SNIP
>Again this is a government decision - your government does what it has to do to suit what ever needs it feels it needs to, if that involves training terrorists, then they will do. I will oppose that and I would guess a good many number of americans would do also. I am in no doubt that my governments have done equally bad things & will oppose those.

True. I agree. Many governments act on behalf of their citizens while at the same time some of those same citizens may not support their government's actions. Some argure that the government has more information than the people and is making decisions 'on behalf of their citizens' while others argue that the information (if it exists) should be made public so the citizens can make up their own mind. Our government for instance is supposed to be 'of the people, by the people, for the people...' Protecting our intelligence resources may be one justification, but there must come a point where the public needs sufficient information to make informed decisions for their well-being and that of others.

A large argument has been made that the U.S. needs to backout of interference in other nations completely. That it is not the U.S. responsibility to police the world nor to even promote democracy in any other country as each country has the right to choose what is right for them. I support that position myself, however, I watched an interview this morning with the Queen of Jordan who stated that she felt the U.S. has a reponsibility as the last remaining super-power to be involved. Some U.S. citizens feel the same way.

Also, some feel that war is not justified under any circumstance unless you are first fired upon by another nation and then only in self-defense.

>
>Your military, including pilots, will be involved in a massive blitz of Baghdad & other prime targets in the open days of the war with Iraq, under a policy called "Awe & Shock" - it is designed to instill fear & terror into the military & citizens in and around Baghdad. People involved in actions designed to induce fear and terror in another group of people by definition are terrorists - your country is training your military & pilots to cause terror in the Iraqi people, like it or not, they are terorists.


Here is the definition of terrorism from our Department of State:


Definition of Terrorist Activity used in these Designations


"(ii)TERRORIST ACTIVITY DEFINED.-As used in this Act, the term "terrorist activity" means any activity which is unlawful under the laws of the place where it is committed (or which, if committed in the United States, would be unlawful under the laws of the United States or any State) and which involves any of the following:


"(I) The highjacking or sabotage of any conveyance (including an aircraft, vessel, or vehicle).
"(II) The seizing or detaining, and threatening to kill, injure, or continue to detain, another individual in order compel a third person (including a governmental organization) to do or abstain from doing any act as an explicit or implicit condition for the release of the individual seized or detained.

"(III) A violent attack upon an internationally protected person (as defined in section 1116(b)(4) of title 18, United States code) or upon the liberty of such a person.

"(IV) An assassination.

"(V) The use on any-

"(a) biological agent, chemical agent, or nuclear weapon or device,

or

"(b) explosive or firearm (other than for mere personal monetary gain), with intent to endanger, directly or indirectly, the safety of one or more individuals or to cause substantial damage to property.

"(VI) A threat, attempt, or conspiracy to do any of the foregoing.


There is more including FTOS and definitions of terrorist activity, etc from:

http://usinfo.state.gov/topical/pol/terror/fto1999.htm

This (regarding the IRA) is from the Questions section and is interesting:


Q: Why isn't the IRA on the list?


There is a strong body of evidence documenting historic IRA involvement in terrorist activity. This evidence precedes the time, two years ago, when we first considered designating the IRA as an FTO.
At that time, the Secretary of State took note of the IRA's unequivocal cease-fire, as well as the subsequent decision by the British government that the cease-fire was "genuine in word and deed." This permitted Sinn Fein to join inclusive, all-party talks in Belfast.

The peace process in Northern Ireland continues, albeit not without obvious difficulties, and we have again determined that the IRA should not be designated at this time. We are, however, concerned over recent indications of increased terrorist activity in Northern Ireland, and we will continue to monitor closely the activities of all paramilitary groups.

Q: What happens if the IRA carries out another act of terrorism, such as killing a police officer or blowing up a police station?


We will not speculate on hypothetical situations. We expect the IRA to adhere to its responsibility to maintain the cease-fire. Obviously, any resumption of violence by the IRA would have a direct impact on the ongoing review.