2006-06-10 03:49:16 · 15 answers · asked by minista 1 in Politics & Government ➔ Military
You can't fight the cause without fighting the effect. Remember that terrorists like to fight from the shadows behind your back. Fortunately there were a few captures in the news recently, so I think that part of the plan is going about as well as it can.
2006-06-11 09:56:28 · answer #1 · answered by thewildeman2 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋
No i dont think Mr. Bush could fight the ultimate causes of terrorism because then he'd be fighting himself and his Office. The ultimate motives behind this PRESENT wave is that America promised to aid Muslim circles in ousting Russian probing into their Northern Countries. At the same time they set up shop in their southern states-Saudi Arabia, Kuwait etc. The oppolent lifestyle of America and its hunger to fuel this crazy way is the ultimate cause of this terrorism. If all AMerican troops pulled out of NON_AMERICA, they did away with arms supplies, blockades, sanctions, bombing and co-operatively handled the worlds oil supplies then maybe, just maybe terrorism would ease off.
2006-06-10 12:38:26 · answer #2 · answered by zephyrescent 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
In my humble opinion, the war on terror, should be waged with a two pronged attacked. The causes, and the effects, should be fought. The causes should be fought, to prevent future terrorist attacks. The effects should be attacked, to show our resolve, which should always be to respond to these heinous acts, with all the force we can muster, and no less.
It does us no good to fight the effects, if we dont fight the cause, which is usually ignorance, poverty, and blood feuds. The problem we face in fightiing the cause, is how do we make policy, to fight poverty, ignorance, and blood feuds, that will be effective, in soverign countries. These unfortunate souls are not even being helped by there own government, so how can we help them, without interfering with the soverignity of their goverment?
Another cause that allot of people do not really grasp the magnitude of, is foreign governments financing the training and equiping, of terrorists. We should have a firm doctrine, in the mold of the Monroe Doctrine, that we will not tolerate any foreign financing of terrorists. That we consider this to be interference in the normal course of a soverigin government, and we will use force, if nescesarry, to stop it.
Iran, North Korea, and Syria, should be put on notice. Stop funding terrorism, or face military action. I believe if we bomb the heck out of them, they will stop. If that doesnt work, then we should invade, and take these governments out of power. Then pull out and let the people of these countrys decide their course, with the strong warning we will invade again, if you fund terrorists. We should be prepared to act unilaterally, in these matters.
2006-06-10 11:34:33 · answer #3 · answered by Old Soldier 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
I've always said we should change our foreign policy but Mr Bush can't think that far ahead. You do have a good question but most Republican will not be able to understand what you just ask.
2006-06-10 10:56:18 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
We are - in fact Iraq is part of that strategy of looking at causes and creating the base for social, political, religious and economic reform in the Middle East.
2006-06-10 13:01:53 · answer #5 · answered by MikeGolf 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Don't you think that is asking a bit much from him? I mean, the poor man cannot even pronounce "nuclear". It will be up to our next president to clean up Bush's mess.
2006-06-16 20:47:39 · answer #6 · answered by Ark 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Do you know what is the causes of terrorism?
-American intervention in the muslim world
-Israeli occupation in muslim lands,then it threaten its neighbor by producing the only nuclear weapon in mideast
-American double standard to israel,palestine and iran
-so many other injustice by the USA
2006-06-10 11:03:43 · answer #7 · answered by arifin ceper 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
he couldnt fight his way out of a wet paper bag if haliburton and the oil companies didnt tell him what to do. fighting the causes just arent that profitable to certain special interests.
2006-06-10 10:55:17 · answer #8 · answered by thale138 5 · 0⤊ 0⤋
I fail to see what you mean? By fight causes of terrorism, do you mean, destroy, our culture and adapt to theirs, so that the muslims will be happy? They dont dont lik ewomans, right, the dont like homosexuals, they dont like our wastful ways, they dont like that we eat bacon, They dont like that we dont worship allah, they dont like our liberal ways.... Outside of womans rights, these are things that Bush does fight
2006-06-10 10:55:35 · answer #9 · answered by asssholejohn 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Yes I do think so. But first he would have to stop being a war mongering, knuckle dragging Neanderthal.
2006-06-10 10:56:00 · answer #10 · answered by champion of the underdog 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋