Do you think it's possible to win a war on terror

[Missourian]

Pretty cut and dry

The real question is, what's the alternative?

 

[Robert]

I see, a person living in close proximity to a terrorist is partially at fault for what a terrorist does based on where they live. Or simple DNA, what my mother/father/brother/sister do is my fault also.

Okie dokie.

Suicide bombs aren't expensive, AK's aren't, box cutters aren't, but one thing that I do know is expensive and causing a huge impact on the people paying for it is our war on terror.

Yet this is where we find ourselves the alternative is to simply submit to their demands again is this what you are suggesting?

Just how many of those people living in close proximity are in fact supporters? How many of those people give tactful approval of the actions of the terrorists because their is no cost to them? Again they are part of the problem they also have a responsibility to put an end to the activity of the terrorists groups.

Submit to their demands? I haven't said anything remotely like that. I'm demanding border and port security, which no one in Washington on either side of the aisle takes seriously which leaves us wide open for terror attacks around the clock.

Terrorists love us being over there, closer proximity makes us easier to kill and what better motivator for a terrorist group to grow than to go after the people they deem responsbile for attacking their homeland/families?

Well Hell Drock we've done better then that yes today we strip search Grandma and 6 year old kids at airports there is no need to beef up our borders hell no its those children that need to be molested for national security don't you know.

As far as us being over there pissing in their Wheaties I would rather we wipe them out there rather then here. The argument that we make more terrorists only goes so far these people have 14 century mindset and no matter what we do their going to want to kill us.

 

[xsited1]

Do you think it's possible to win a war on terror

The US has already spent over $1 trillion fighting the war on terror and everybody knows that if you spend that kind of money you're gonna win some kind of award.

 

[Seawytch]

Pretty cut and dry

The real question is, what's the alternative?

Terrorism has been effectively combat-ted. How was it done? I recall reading a report on it somewhere a long time ago. I do recall that military solutions were the least effective.

 

[Two Thumbs]

Pretty cut and dry

Not the way we are fighting now.

We are at war with people that freely travel the world. We need to make it clear, to the world, if you have terrorist in your country, and you don't do enough about it, we will.

As it is, we are trying to nation build and prop up governments that only want our money and in return provide little assistance.


Why did we kill OBL in Pakistan? My bet would be b/c he paid them to keep him safe. And I bet we [CIA] know this, but to keep the peace with this scum, we are going to keep limiting our efforts.


If we went all out, we could make an example that will not be forgotten.

 

[Dr.Drock]

Yet this is where we find ourselves the alternative is to simply submit to their demands again is this what you are suggesting?

Just how many of those people living in close proximity are in fact supporters? How many of those people give tactful approval of the actions of the terrorists because their is no cost to them? Again they are part of the problem they also have a responsibility to put an end to the activity of the terrorists groups.

Submit to their demands? I haven't said anything remotely like that. I'm demanding border and port security, which no one in Washington on either side of the aisle takes seriously which leaves us wide open for terror attacks around the clock.

Terrorists love us being over there, closer proximity makes us easier to kill and what better motivator for a terrorist group to grow than to go after the people they deem responsbile for attacking their homeland/families?

Well Hell Drock we've done better then that yes today we strip search Grandma and 6 year old kids at airports there is no need to beef up our borders hell no its those children that need to be molested for national security don't you know.

As far as us being over there pissing in their Wheaties I would rather we wipe them out there rather then here. The argument that we make more terrorists only goes so far these people have 14 century mindset and no matter what we do their going to want to kill us.

That's my point, you can't wipe them out there, killing some of them creates more of them. Also if you kill an innocent person in the process you may turn a nice moral person into a crazed terrorist if you killed an innocent person they loved (family member, spouse, etc).

I'm not going to argue if they want to kill us no matter what or not, maybe they do maybe they don't, but guarding the areas they could enter (ports/borders) is the best tactic imo.

 

[auditor0007]

We have a war that whose goals are not defined, what does victory look like? This president nor Bush properly defined what victory is.

It took us less time to conquer Nazi Germany and Imperial Japan than a third world shit hole like Afghanistan. We must elect someone that will actually end these endless military adventures.

We can't end the war until Afghanistan is somewhat stable. They hold the world's largest reserves of lithium.

 

[Sunni Man]

Which goes to show that the war isn't about terrorism it's about preserving access to resources.

 

[peach174]

We could stop them in their tracks right now, if we let it be known that the bullets and bombs we are using is soaked in pigs blood. It stop them cold the last time this tactic was used. We should do it again.
But noooo, we have to be politically correct.

 

[Robert]

We could stop them in their tracks right now, if we let it be known that the bullets and bombs we are using is soaked in pigs blood. It stop them cold the last time this tactic was used. We should do it again.
But noooo, we have to be politically correct.

IMO we've been far to mild in our response to these animals the only thing these people seem to understand is who is stronger so be it they want to be martyr's then I have no problem making them so. As the saying goes one doesn't win battles by dying for your country but by making the other guy die for his.

 

[High_Gravity]

You can't end terror

But that doesn't mean you shouldn't go after organized groups that engage in terror tactics. The US has been very successful in going after terrorist leaders, funding and most importantly public support.

We still need to remain vigilent in cutting down on vulnerable targets, reporting suspicious behavior and monitoring terrorist activities.

We can't win totally, but we can come close

I would mention the German terrorist group that was known as the Red Army Faction

At one time it was Germany's most violent and prominent left wing terror group.
Now it's ancient history and has been suppressed out of existence. It was started in 1970 and disbanded in 1998.

Perhaps there is a lesson with the group in how terrorist organizations and activities can be eliminated?

Same with the Tamil Tigers in Sri Lanka, they were a force for decades and it took time but the Sri Lankans eventually finished them off.

 

[Sunni Man]

We could stop them in their tracks right now, if we let it be known that the bullets and bombs we are using is soaked in pigs blood. It stop them cold the last time this tactic was used. We should do it again.
But noooo, we have to be politically correct.

That tactic work against Filipino Muslims over 100 years ago who didn't know their religion very well.

Silly people in the West think that pigs blood is some kind of anti-Muslim kryptonite.

The only prohibition in the Qurans not to eat pig meat.

Anything other than that is just superstition and nonsense.

 

[High_Gravity]

We could stop them in their tracks right now, if we let it be known that the bullets and bombs we are using is soaked in pigs blood. It stop them cold the last time this tactic was used. We should do it again.
But noooo, we have to be politically correct.

You can't win a war and be nice to the people you are fighting, it doesn't work.

 

[Dr.Drock]

Which goes to show that the war isn't about terrorism it's about preserving access to resources.

Yep and specifically oil.


Iraq both times, Afghanistan now, Libya, the reason we and Englad have hated Iran for decades, all because of oil.

 

[MaggieMae]

Yes....

But we have to stop this politically correct bullshit, go whole hog, and stop pulling punches... open up ever means of attack at our disposal.. show zero tolerance for rogue nations that coddle or support these terrorist groups... the current way we have been trying to handle this leads us nowhere

You don't retaliate against a murderous attacker with a slap on the arm, and you don't pussyfoot around with terrorists

The problem with conducting all-out war against nation states is that there will still be lone wolves using insidious methods that can do major damage. In fact, those are the most worrisome kind of terrorist.

 

[peach174]

We could stop them in their tracks right now, if we let it be known that the bullets and bombs we are using is soaked in pigs blood. It stop them cold the last time this tactic was used. We should do it again.
But noooo, we have to be politically correct.

That tactic work against Filipino Muslims over 100 years ago who didn't know their religion very well.

Silly people in the West think that pigs blood is some kind of anti-Muslim kryptonite.

The only prohibition in the Qurans not to eat pig meat.

Anything other than that is just superstition and nonsense.

You got any idea how many still believe that they won't go to heaven with pig's blood on them?
Many and I mean many still believe in superstiton, especially the ones that they are recruiting for terrorist jihad, They actually believe that they will go to heaven with the 70 virgins. That is also superstition.

 

[Immanuel]

And so the alternative is what? Are you suggesting people should just submit to what the terrorists want

No, just take a more defend our country approach than attack all of their countries approach.

Killing people's families and attacking their homeland creates more hate than defending ones ports and borders.

The way I see it is that its a matter of economics we prosecute the war on terror in a way that makes it so damned expensive for the other side that they have no choice to either stop what they are doing or be forced to stop by the indigenous population.

And no I have no problem killing people familys to end the blood shed they are also part of the process in that they are responsible for curbing the animals unless they feel the pain equally there is no reason for the terror to stop

Why don't we just go the other way? If we are going to fight them economically, why don't we just do it the liberal way. Give them so much money that they fall in love with us and don't want to hurt us. We can "stimulate" the end of terror!

What is a few hundred trillion among friends? The way Congress looks at it is, "It is only money".

Immie

 

[MaggieMae]

We have a war that whose goals are not defined, what does victory look like? This president nor Bush properly defined what victory is.

It took us less time to conquer Nazi Germany and Imperial Japan than a third world shit hole like Afghanistan. We must elect someone that will actually end these endless military adventures.

Thats because in Germany and Japan we did what was necessary to win, at the time we were not concerned with winning the hearts and minds of the Japanese and German people. Right now in Afghanistan we are trying to win a war and not offend the Afghans at the same time, thats a recipe for failure.

Even if we left Afganistan having won their hearts and minds, the country has no means of supporting itself economically without foreign aid, except for their poppy industry. This would never be done of course, but one way to maintain a great ongoing relationship with Afghanistan would be to legalize drugs and import that crop. Heroin and other drugs could then be taxed at point of sale like any other imported commodity.

 

[MaggieMae]

I took my kid to the amusement park the other day.

This one arcade game had a bunch of Little guys that would pop up out of holes.

You had this mallet and you hit them on the head when one popped up.

But every time that you hit one on the head another one popped up somewhere else.

This could go on and on until you ran out of money.

I'm sure that there is an anology here.

McCain was the first to dub that "Whack-A-Mole."

 

[Sunni Man]

We could stop them in their tracks right now, if we let it be known that the bullets and bombs we are using is soaked in pigs blood. It stop them cold the last time this tactic was used. We should do it again.
But noooo, we have to be politically correct.

That tactic work against Filipino Muslims over 100 years ago who didn't know their religion very well.

Silly people in the West think that pigs blood is some kind of anti-Muslim kryptonite.

The only prohibition in the Qurans not to eat pig meat.

Anything other than that is just superstition and nonsense.

You got any idea how many still believe that they won't go to heaven with pig's blood on them?
Many and I mean many still believe in superstiton, especially the ones that they are recruiting for terrorist jihad, They actually believe that they will go to heaven with the 70 virgins. That is also superstition.

Please provide evidence for your allegations.

The 72 Virgins thing has a legitimate basis found in the Hadiths and has nothing to do with superstition.

The pigs blood thing is just superstition.