Heywood,

I am not for genocide. I am for eliminating the a-holes that did this, their families, and their supporters. If we only go after them, then the next guy in line will step up to strap on the TNT blazer so he can take out 40 or 50 more people. If this group is large, then so be it. They only have a few hundred million targets here in the U.S., so what is your cut-off before we get tough?

These terrorists do not fight fair. That is why all attempts to fight them in the past have failed, because we do have a rule book.

It is a sad state of affairs when we must consider the killing of innocents, but man has accepted this as an undesirable side effect of war. We are at war, don't kid yourself. I don't want any innocents person on their side killed, but from the celebrations seen in their streets, it is certainly apparent that they couldn't give a flying [Bleeeeep!] about us. That doesn't make them seem so innocent, does it now?

We must make it very undesirable to be near these bad guys. We must make it dangerous to associate with them.

Anything less than the complete erradication of these groups is unacceptable, because they will keep on sending their zealots over here to kill us.

Killing isn't a pleasant affair. It is necessary in some situations, and this is the time. We need to make a point to anyone out there thinking of similar attacks that if you mess with us, the hornets will be after you, and we won't stop until you get stung.

GW needs to repeal the presidential order outlawing assassination as a tool of diplomacy. All it takes is a signature. that would send a rather powerful message to those that would send their followers to their deaths in attempts to kill us.

Andy