English Deutsch Français Italiano Español Português 繁體中文 Bahasa Indonesia Tiếng Việt ภาษาไทย
All categories

To my way of thinking, if people in the world who currently live in inhumane conditions had a decent living environment, access to good education and real possibilities to be employed, there would be considerably less anger against countries, governments and systems and therefore less people to become involved in terrorism.

When I see an area, in this case, Lebanon, being bombed (rightly or wrongly) I can only think of the subsequent terrible living conditions that ordinary human beings will have to endure and who they will seek to avenge for the destruction of their world. Get the picture?

So, how about instead of bombs, we (or in this example, Israel) spends money on building hospitals, schools etc and is seen to be HELPING the impoverished neighbors they have. The same is true of us in the West. Instead of war lets spend the billions of dollars on helping to improve the lives of the poor and then we might actually get nearer to Bono's ideal which is to "make poverty history".

2006-07-18 09:44:01 · 13 answers · asked by Anonymous in Politics & Government Military

13 answers

Terrorism is not created by lack of education employment opportunities. If this were the case then 70% of the world's population would be terrorists.

In fact most of the 'boss' terrorists are fairly well educated and come from fairly comfortable surroundings.

On the other hand what you say is part of the picture. The current terrorist groups were created out of a specific cultural context.

The elements of this context are:
1) Lack of economic opportunity
2) Lack of political freedom
3) Lack of religious freedom
4) The discouragement of education
5) Heavy propaganda

In order to break the cycle of terrorism all of these must be addressed. And the only way to address this is to set up an example of a nation to show people that those old ways are _not_ the only way that 'works.' (Can you say: "Iraq?")

2006-07-18 10:50:19 · answer #1 · answered by MikeGolf 7 · 1 0

I agree with your idea to create a Marshall Plan for the Least Developed Countries, but the time to do so was during the Cold War. With the collapse of the Soviet Union, the tensions built for centuries were unleashed upon the New World Order (or probably defines the New World Order). Hence we see things happening in Bosnia, Somalia, and countless other countries. The turmoil caused by proxy warfare of the Cold War and the lack of international assistance creates a less than hospitable atmosphere for the people of these countries.

A Marshall Plan for all those Least Industrialized Nations would have secured the basic foundations for Maslow's Heirarchy of Needs, which would in turn lead to the top of Maslow's Heirarchy. But of course, this would have been one way of reducing but not solving our issues with terrorism.

Terrorism occurs because some believes that hurting innocent people or property is morally just if the cause is "right." It is an issue of someone's beliefs. No one can end that idea, just as people still believe in Communism today. To some people, it is morally acceptable and to others it is not. There is no universal moral system that everyone follows.

Other factors tie into the proliferation of terrorism. Social and political factors also help create the atmosphere needed to encourage terrorism. These factors must be addressed as well in order to discourage terrorism. But there will always be some odd apples in the barrel, and that is something that humans cannot change.

2006-07-18 10:04:40 · answer #2 · answered by nerdyjohn 3 · 0 0

Ironically, thanks to oil, most of the nations that harbor terrorist have some of the world’s highest average incomes per family. Unfortunately there is a HUGE gap between the rich and the poor and virtually no middle class. In general, the poorer you are the more likely you are to go towards an extreme religious belief. If the countries decided to invest in building a middle class and civilizing their countries there would be significantly less violence in the region and much less jealousy towards the rich and powerful. Basically the Middle East is about 2000 years behind the civilized world.

2006-07-18 09:53:12 · answer #3 · answered by Thomas the Tank 2 · 0 0

The Culture is where the battle is needed to defeat terrorism. Just look at our kids today, or the majority of us today. We are lazy. Once we instill laziness into thier culture, no one will have the motivation to terrorize anyone. However, in order to get lazy, one must be spoiled. However, not just in money, because terrorists want money, but when they start useing it to buy flat screen TV's and Dodge Vipers I'm sure we will see a decrease in terrorism. (Who wants to blow up a Dodge Viper?)

Now my idea may seem far-fetched, but it is basically one step after yours. Once people have a decent living, we need to make them search after other stuff to be happy. My idea just comes from me questioning myself of my I am not a terrorist. My answer is I like to do thing that are fun, like watching football on Sundays and eat at McDonald's, even sleep in on the Weekends, and play some golf. Persoanally I think its the constant sand in your eyes and everything. I know that would get me really frustrated.

All what I am trying to say is that a life of a terrorist is no fun that they doesn't seem to be a problem in dying since they are rewarded greatly. However, they do not seem to know that there are men else where in the world that have been able to fine 72 virgins and are still living to tell about. Once a terrorist is given a chance to be Hugh Hefner, terrorism would become a thing of the past. Of course terrorists hate the Western World with a passion but if we can find something that can fit into there culture of the stuff I have just describe, the world would have other problems to worry about.

2006-07-18 18:59:21 · answer #4 · answered by freemanbac 5 · 0 0

Wars are fought for one reason only: economics. The reasons for going to war include national security, helping people, religion, etc.

We are living in a world of finite resources. Without these resources, like oil, fresh water, agricultural land, minerals, timber, fishing rights, people would starve and live in stone age conditions. When resources start becoming scarce, people have no choice but to do whatever it takes to acquire those resources, including war.

Conflicts in the Middle East would simply constitute "religious strife" or "civil wars" or "genocide" if there was no oil in the region. But there is a lot of oil in the Middle East, and that oil is necessary for modern existence where the discovery of new oil fields worldwide have dropped dramatically.

To secure that oil, the U.S. and Britain have initiated their war in Iraq and Afghanistan. The reasons for war include national security and helping the people of Iraq. Islamofascists use religion as an excuse for waging war against America. The masses will never agree to fight and die so that their leaders can become even more rich. But the masses are easily manipulated into believing that Sadam posed a direct threat to the U.S. Young arabs are easily manipulated into becoming suicide bombers in exchange for ever lasting paradise.

The answer to your question is "no". Helping poor people will not stop wars because wars will be fought for diminishing resources and our natural resources are running out. So either we fight wars for oil and whatever else we need, or we live and die under stone age famine conditions.

2006-07-18 10:15:51 · answer #5 · answered by eddygordo19 6 · 0 0

Lebanon is known as the Caribbean of the east. Its tourism is out of site and is a metropolitan city. Not a slum or non educated. Until all people agree that everybody has a right to their beliefs and a right to practice said beliefs there will never be peace. The conflicts that are happening now have nothing to do with poverty,But with one groups dislike of another.

2006-07-18 09:58:11 · answer #6 · answered by bereal1 6 · 0 0

But suppose I run a country and steal (oil wealth) from my own people. Instead of giving them hospitals and other services, I convince them we are under siege by the infidels in Israel/USA. Then my people can hate the west and I can continue to steal from my people. To permit the west to build hospitals would undercut my argument and put my power at risk.

Your idea is great for countries with relatively little corruption... consider Germany and Japan's response to the Marshall plan.

2006-07-18 09:51:35 · answer #7 · answered by Brand X 6 · 0 0

Well, that would take care of terrorism caused by economic factors. But there are lots of other terrorists that believe that Western countries, the United States in particular, are agents of the Devil himself. I don't think that there is any real other answer to defeating religous zealots because they think that they are serving a higher power. The very faithful ones will NEVER change because they think that if you kill them, then they will inherit a heavenly reward in the afterlife. What can a person, a nation, or anyone do that would cause them to renounce their God (be he Allah, Jesus, Jehovah, etc)?

2006-07-18 09:51:17 · answer #8 · answered by Righteous1 2 · 0 0

IN MY OPINION THE BEST WAY OF DEFEATING TERRORISM IS TO KILL THE TERRORISTS. ANY PERSON NOT IN A LEGITIMATE GOVERNMENT MILITARY UNIFORM AND CARRYING A WEAPON SHOULD BE SHOT. DEAD.
GIVE MONEY. HELP THE POOR. GIVE THEM EDUCATION. HELP THEM TO IMPROVE THEIR LIVES....DREAMING AGAIN ARE WE... THE TALIBAN IN AFGHANISTAN CLOSED SCHOOLS STOPPED PEOPLE FROM BEING EDUCATED. STOPPED WOMEN FROM LEARNING ANYTHING OTHER THAN WHAT A POT WAS FOR.. THAT WAS MONEY WELL SPENT...IRAQ..ONE OF THE OIL RICH COUNTRIES IN THE MIDDLE EAST UNDER SADDAM. HAD AS MANY POOR PEOPLE LIVING IN IT THAN ANYWHERE ELSE..SO MUCH FOR THE SHARE THE WEALTH. PALESTINIANS THEY HAVE THEIR OWN FORM OF EDUCATION. THEY LEARN HOW TO PUSH A BUTTON TO EXPLODE BOMBS. THEY LEARN TO CARRY AND FIRE WEAPONS BEFORE THEY LEARN TO READ. AS FAR AS I KNOW ISRAEL DONT GO DESTROYING PALESTINIAN SCHOOLS. IN FACT ISRAEL EMPLOYS THE VAST MAJORITY OF PALESTINIANS. AND MY LAST POINT IS ON BONE HEAD BONO. SEEMS LIKE HE IS LIVING OK COMFORTABLE. GETS INTO THE HEADLINES NOW AND AGAIN. JUST TO KEEP UP HIS REVENUE.AND HIS MEAGER INCOME. IT DOES NOT MATTER HOW MANY HOSPITALS,SCHOOLS,HOUSES. YOU BUILD FOR THOSE PEOPLE BECAUSE THEY WILL NEVER BE SATISFIED WITH WHAT THEY HAVE.

2006-07-18 13:20:03 · answer #9 · answered by Anonymous · 0 0

http://www.vestedowl.com/counterpoint_results.htm
bush soulh be stop of killing ppl and should no more be president and isreal can stay in her land and shut up

2006-07-18 09:51:51 · answer #10 · answered by azaab_habibi 3 · 0 0

fedest.com, questions and answers