How to win the war on terror

#21
Glee - Thanks Glee. :).

PingPong - Oh...Pingpong. Another nugget of wisdom. I like Phantom's responses, but I figure I'll throw in my own before I start studying again.

We definitely gave Indians smallpox infected blankets. That wasn't terrorism, but biological warfare. The key difference is that we weren't trying to frighten them or induce a panic, we just wanted to kill as many as could as efficiently possible. Sadly...that was not the worst thing that any of the major countries anywhere (America, Europe, and Asia) did during that time. That said, they would have probably done similar things to us if they thought it would help win the war.

terrorism can only be fought by openess , honesty and knowledge. First off an appology to teh iranian people for destroying democracy in their country. Next , no more covert operations for selfish power, controlling the governments of third world nations since ww2, bringing the troops home asap from places we dont need them. If we do this, Al quaeda will be so ticked off because no one will want to join them anymore. In other words they will be screwed and we wont even need to lift a finger on them to crush them.
Alright...one at a time.

1. Terrorism by definition can't be fought with honesty and openness. They are not rebels trying to establish freedom or anything remotely noble. They are religious fanatics in the same style as McVeigh. Their interest is to convert or destroy us. Terrorism by definition is a series of attacks with the intent of demoralizing or "terrorizing" the population. Inviting them over for tea won't make it better (unless we have some smallpox on hand :) ).

2. WTF? What does Iran have to do with anything. I don't even believe we are fighting any significant number of Iranians. Most of their people are being used to support Hezbollah and whoever the flavor of the month is in Palestine. They don't care about us that much.

An Aside for Phantom

He's been forcing Iran into every topic. He sees this as some prime example of corporate greed screwing up a country. He refuses to even remotely acknowledge the fact that it was a mixture of Cold War politics, red scare, fight for mineral resources, etc. that fueld it.

The irony is that I've told him time and time again to look at what we did in Central America 100 years ago. We really did take over entire countries so that fruit farms could have the lowest prices possible by using what basically amounted to slave labor.

End Derail

3. Which 3rd world countries are we controlling exactly. I don't think it takes covert ops to practically run a country. Most of them major countries have stepped back from covert action for political gain (mostly counter terrorism and general intelligence). The corporations do just fine at establishing beneficial contracts with third world countries. They don't really need our help.

4. Where exactly do you want to pull back troops from. We are on a workable extraction from Iraq and Afghanistan is a good fight. They actually want us there and are begging for help to stop the Taliban from taking back the country. As a special note, I believe that the Taliban issued a special order to target schools that teach women, because women shouldn't learn...this is what we are fighting. I've also seen a lot of reports from the Northern Coalition. Those guys risked everything to win their country back. We owe it to them to stand by them now.

5. Terrorist recruitment isn't usually based off of political anger. Insurgency in Iraq was in part, but most terrorists are produced by the radical Imams and teachers in their countries. Al-Qeada was primarily supported by middle-class and wealthy Saudis who want to support Islam and fight what they see as a threatening culture. They then use the Imams and teachers to convince the poor that it's a good cause to die for. Just one big cycle.

If we pulled out of the Middle East, then they would just find something else to hate us for. We would just go back to the capitalist pigs of the west (assuming that we even backed away from Israel).

--
I see there's more ranting about Iran. I don't even know who you are talking about this to anymore. We help some countries because we want to help them. We help other because it makes sense politically or economically. It may sound strange, but adults can view the world as many shades of gray. Our past actions can be anything from horrifying to understandable to altruistic.
 
#22
My take on how to strategize within the war on terrorism to come to the best outcome

Here is what I think. In order to achieve a wanted outcome within the war on terrorism, you first have to have an inside information source. If you were to look at a book, given to you by a country you were supposed to help, complete with an alterior motive, wouldn't you question alterior motive first and foremost, instead of just accepting the playing field? It's just like disappearing ink! They give you a book to read with the text, but the underlying issues (which the financial situation deems as doomed either way) and the root of the problem can not be fixed. Hence the soldiers from the terrorist countries are willing to die. There are explained there is no way out, there is no resolution, because there is not enough resources to help them.

So, they pose a false deck of cards to the dealer, in hopes of gaining enough financial aid or soldiers labor and fruits of such labor to make an impact that will allow them to survive until the next fixed deck of cards they give a super power country such as us, the USA.

What I pose we do, is give a country that is highly involved in terrorism a technology with a worldwide patent (If such a thing exists), that would then allow them to procure themselves as a country. For example, our country functions just fine with the technologies we have. People live an overall happy life with the technologies we have already made possible. The brand new technologies can only serve to make an extremely rich business (Such as apple or microsoft), rich beyond all imagination.

What if one of these super power technology companies, you know, the ones that will rule the planet in financial superiority if not broken up into different company structures? What if they GAVE away a super technology to one of these terrorist countries. They are willing to die and run full scale suicide missions, the true threat and danger equation to the country.

Such a price to be paid is the ultimate one, and anybody or any group willing to do this shouldn't be taken lightly. Compromise and taking a hit in the pocketbook is the ONLY WAY. Negotiate a true GIFT, of harmless super technology, designed to only produce revenue. As its primary function of income, it can harm none, and can only serve to make a suffering country prosper.

I can not think of a super technology that can work a miracle, but I know someone else can. I wouldn't take a dying mans water, but I would take a glass of water from a company rich enough to not care who takes what drink from who within their circle or how many glasses. These technology companies are the epitome of that in the grandest scale imaginable. Don't forget we are under GOD, and we have to answer to them. I can not hold it in my heart to believe that, although supremely happy, people in power do not have an overall global conscience. I am not saying care about another mans (or womans) feelings as your own because that is IMPOSSIBLE. All I am saying is that we all have to answer to GOD when we die, whatever or whoever he or she may be. The only way to end terrorism is work out the real deal, the real negotiation that wipes out any chance of deceit. That takes a gift of supreme proportions, the gift that keeps on giving, a HARMLESS super technology, only able to be dispensed by them!

What do you all think, do you think my structure of thought i flawed? I am eager to hear your opinions, especially from the die hard political thought machines.
 
Mar 2009
2,187
2
#23
The main problem comes from the teachers of radical Islam that breed a new generation of terrorists. There's no military solution to that. Any military solution would just cause more angry amongst those on the fence.
Agreed that education has to be key in forming a resistance to teaching of radical Islam. If money could be invested in better schools and infrastructure, to create healthier communities, I can imagine that would assist greatly in forming resistance to teaching of radical Islam.
 

Similar Discussions