it's like the fire ant mound in your yard,.if you kill only the ones that bite you, the rest are left to have their turn at you. you have to kill the whole mound to stop any further attacks.
2006-07-12 02:20:17
·
answer #1
·
answered by truthteller 5
·
0⤊
0⤋
This is the question of our times.
It's not just a U.S. problem, as another has said in their answer. This is a global problem. It transcends different religions, different countries, different reasons. It seemingly all comes down to the world against them.
If only the news outlets in the United States would actually show the terrorists how they really are. As barbaric, wacko, nut jobs. Who believe that if they die, they will receive 49 virgins or some other bull crap like that. They have no real rhyme or reason for being terrorists other than they want to cause havoc on the world, no matter your country or race.
So how will we ALL stop terrorism? Who knows! They have been killing each other for decades, even centuries, they have only recently set their targets on the world super powers, bringing their insane montra into the forefront.
Maybe we shouldn't give them the air time, maybe we shut down their news outlets. They only do it to see their name in lights. Why else would you murder innocent women, children on their way to work/school? What good could possibly come of this? If anyone honestly feels good comes from that, you are truly and absolutely INSANE.
2006-07-12 02:26:36
·
answer #2
·
answered by bradyb 2
·
0⤊
0⤋
Well, what we could do is actually go after the countries where the terrorists are from (like Saudi Arabia, Iran, Syria, etc.) Bu tthat won't happen because the Bush family is too tight with the Saudi royal family.
The next thing we could do is stop supporting Israel as long as they continue to act like they are the only country in the world that matters and continues to oppress the Palestinian people. Of course, that won't happen either.
2006-07-12 02:21:36
·
answer #3
·
answered by JeffyB 7
·
0⤊
0⤋
Offhand I'd say put the NY Times out of business.
Not only did they publish two tools that we were using against terrorists, but published the private addresses of top administration officials.
If they are so interested in letting the American Public, and the terrorists, know so much, why don't the publish the private addresses of the publisher and editor of the NY Times as well?
2006-07-12 02:23:44
·
answer #4
·
answered by SPLATT 7
·
0⤊
0⤋
I'd say to quit him-hawing around and exact a decisive retribution. If they blew up a city block of ours with no regard to collateral damage, then we should teach them a real lesson and level an entire city. You can't be the big dog on the block withut proving it once in a while.
2006-07-12 02:23:32
·
answer #5
·
answered by Ricky J. 6
·
0⤊
0⤋
We should act on terrorism like Britain finally did with the IRA, Germany did with Bader-Minoff , Italy with the Red Brigade and Clinton did with McVeigh and the first WTC bombers. Catch and prosecute them like the criminals they are!
2006-07-12 02:32:28
·
answer #6
·
answered by ggarsk 3
·
0⤊
0⤋
Adopt a more responsible foreign policy, and nobody will have the need to terrorize. If you want peace, work for justice.
2006-07-12 02:19:49
·
answer #7
·
answered by UserJoe9 3
·
0⤊
0⤋
Get to the roots and address the basics issues. A HUNGRY man is an ANGRY man.
Happy, contented people don't blow up others. They don't inspire others who are weak minded to do the same.
2006-07-12 02:21:56
·
answer #8
·
answered by stacey 5
·
0⤊
0⤋
I agree with you.
Everyone should think a lot more before voting for president, and demand more responsibility from the one elected. The voters are the deciders, not their representative.
2006-07-12 02:21:40
·
answer #9
·
answered by iikozen 3
·
0⤊
0⤋
See now there is a subject Bano should be interested in instead of trying to end poverty. Maybe it would put an end to alot more problems then we are aware of
2006-07-12 02:21:18
·
answer #10
·
answered by boredgirl 4
·
0⤊
0⤋