The cowards are the ones who haven't the guts to openly declare war and come at you in a frontal assault for which you might prepare. Instead, they do things like plant bombs, use humans as shields, and fly planes into buildings.
Ted, I have to take exception to this. Coming by frontal assault may be the courageous way in your book--we have been taught that, I agree--but it may not be everybody's way of being courageous.
And aside from the value judgment, I would say that their actions reflect their priorities: do they want to put on a show whether they get the job done or not, or do they want to use the surest means to accomplish the task?
This goes for our current preparations as well, and fits a lot of the discussion both on the board and in my life here.
What is going to be the top priority of our decision-makers?
If it is to be the elimination of the planners of this attack, assassination may well be in the cards, and to hell with a show of "and justice to all". If the priority is going to be to uphold our standards of letting justice be meted out by the law, then I predict this will be a long,
drawn-out affair. Further, they may want or have to factor in how whatever course of action we take will affect the rest of the world, in a myriad of ways, and this may just be the deciding element in choosing their course.
Oh, dear, I just re-read that, and realized that I sound rather in favor of assassination. I am not, normally. I do believe that there are times when the end justifies the means. In this instance? I really can't say. I would have to know their motive before I could decide. If they truly believe they had accomplished something wonderful, no.
If I found they had done it for "kicks", hell yes.
