I do not think that it serves any purpose to go on about whether someone
thinks that they were cowardly.
On Wed, Sep 12, 2001 at 09:34:27AM -0500, Andrew Hagen wrote:
> I disagree. IMHO, the attack was cowardly. They attacked defenseless
> people. Only cowards do such things.
>
> There is an ass
I disagree. IMHO, the attack was cowardly. They attacked defenseless
people. Only cowards do such things.
There is an assumption that the tactic of secrecy was necessary. This
softly implies that the attack itself was necessary. Not only would
that statement be wrong, it would be a hideous lie.
What has having support from a group or country got to do with its being
"cowardly"?
Keeping the affiliation secret is hardly cowardly. It is a tactical
necessity. To reveal affiliation is to invite immediate reprisal. It just
seems simple prudence. And many in the US will not care that many innoc
