How many people think the war on terror is backfiring?

Question

ok so the war on terror, success or not? is it reducing the number of terrorists (and their activity) or backfiring and increasing the numbers? where's the distinction between terrorists and resistance?
serious and insightful answers only!!!!

Answer 1

I'm not sure if backfire is the right word but the war on terror certainly was not well thought out. First of all, how do you declare war on a tactic that has been used by most of the worlds nations. Everyone, regardless of national origin, is a potential enemy...you cannot distinguish enemy from ally...it is unwinnable. It is controllable if handled correctly; on the street level. Bush, however, was obsessed with Iraq and becoming a war president so he opted to overreact to the criminal action of a bunch of predominantly Saudi Arabian, murderous thugs. If we would have worked with and funded the law enforcement areas of the major Middle Eastern countries we would have been much more successful at a fraction of the cost and none of the lives of our brave men and women of the military.
As for the distinction between terrorists and resistance...which of us wouldn't become a "terrorist" if our own country were invaded?

Answer 2

I believe that it is backfiring because we haven't fought it the way aren enemys are fighting it. The only way we can win a war on terroism is to fight the same way they do over there. We need to casue havic and really show them what America is made of. We also need to do away with the UN and fight this war the right way. You can call me anti-American or whatever you would like but I don't think were fighting this war in a proper manner. It's on the verge of turning into another Vietnam because the terrorists have perfected IED's and are using them always. We have to fight terrorism with some form of our own terrorism. We need to use the big guns so to speak. They need a notice that in 15 days if they don't comply we will nuke every major city in the Middle East. You can only fighht the way they fight, which is dirty.

Answer 3

I would say that results are mixed. Likely there are more terrorists, but they are weakened and less well led. And although this is not good for Iraq, the fact that there is a war zone there creates a place for them to go to die, as nasty as that sounds, its a recognizable truth. Their networks are likely strained and their monetary power lessened. It's also doubtful that they can get weapons as fast as they can be seized, which is reflected in the recent rise in price of automatic weapons in the area (which I could sight the source - its was in magazine I just read).

The difference between terrorists and resistance apparently in what is clearly legal in a country and what is not. "Freedom Fighter" to some people in Lebanon are militants to others. They operate a military outside of the Lebanese Government, illegally carrying illegal weapons with illegal money. The majority of the people in Lebanon and Iraq do not believe that the militants are helping, so they fail the democratic test as well. However, there is a large minority that supports their cause and right to fight.

In the Mideast, often times, clans form a basic government structure. They carry on protecting people even after a national government is formed. This includes groups like Hamas, who builds schools and whatnot to win people over. Similarly many "normal" people are members of Hezbollah (some estimates are as much as 40% of the Lebanese populace). They are not all militant, but are united by ideal or willingness to fight and work for the public good. Destroying Hezbollah is complicated, as is Hamas. By acting illegally they usurp resources the country could use to defend itself and build infrastructure, while at the same time winning over large portions of the populace. Then when they come under attack they seem like underdogs rather than outlaws. It is a matter of perspective that I understand, however,

In developed countries we don't allow militants to act out, all though they certainly exist here, in the United States, and their firepower is very significant. Militants do not typically own "military only" weaponry.

Overall, I'd say that I certainly hope, the "War on Terror" will be an eventual success. I hope the people in Lebanon, Palestine, and Iraq decide that staying the course on their democratic government is the best option. I hope Palestine determines to roll back to a more conservative agenda (one that doesn't include wiping out Israel). I hope Lebanon become strong enough to defend itself without militants, and control most militants and weapons trade within its borders. I have similar hopes for Iraq.

In a way you could call this the "hot" part of WW3, as many of the weapons are remnents from the Cold War. The subversive tactics of the nations involved resulted in a poisoning of middle eastern culture and people with tons of ammuntions and military weapons. Also, because Russia and the United States put so much money into those weapons, it became necessary for them to sell them. Want a big missle for cheap, its gonna be Russian or American.

Will it work? I would say that results are mixed. What do you think?

Answer 4

I'd suggest you read Orwell's 1984 (depressing book, by the way). I think it will give you some insight as to why we word things as we do and what the goals are. As to the specifics of the War on Terror ... I think it was understandable, but stupid, from the get go. Or at least the way Bush was going about it. The SEALS and Rangers could have done a better job then the mess we have now. It may not be policy to execute world leaders (and it is bad policy), but there are no injunctions on arresting global thugs and bringing them to justice ... we have done that successfully.

Answer 5

the war on terrorism is not doing anything instead more people are joing the force ofterrorist !. And terrorist will never run out of places to hide!!! The middle East is right next to Africa and Asia!!! they can hide there!! NOrth Africa, West africa, east africa, and south africa have large Muslim populations same with Asia so do not under estimate the terrorist. Look at the London Bombing, some to the terrorist were British citizens!!! They are Everywhere and they can be anyone

Answer 6

If you shake an apple tree and many apples fall. Did you make the apple pop in the tree b shaking it or did you just make them fall from the tree.

This fight is going on all over the world and has been for a very long time. Some of the country that face it each day are Iraq ,Afghanistan, Thailand, Israel ,India, Philippines, Algeria, Chechnya, Pakistan, Somalia, Kyrgyztan, Ingushetia and Nigeria. Each one of the country's I have state has had a terrorist bomb of kills just in the last 26 days.

So I do not think we made them just by shaking thing up. They were there all the time we just did not see them.

Answer 7

HUGE success. Last time I checked the following major terrorists and leaders are captured or killed and no longer a threat to the United States:

Saddam Hussein, Uday Hussein, Qusay Hussein, Mohammed Atef, Abu Nadal, Khalid Sheik Mohammed, Abu Musab al-Zarqawi, Mustafa Mohamed Fadhil, Ahmed Khalfan Ghailani and thousands of their followers. I'd consider it a huge success on that alone!

Answer 8

What you have to understand is that terrorism is not new. It's been going on for ages. Our media outlets look for every piece of negative exposure in order to scare civilians into thinking that there are terrorists right in our backyards. To answer your question, we are making progress. But we have to eradicate a way of life that has been instilled for centuries. Terrorists are doing the same thing that large governments have been doing for centuries; US included. They see a country who has a resource that they wish to exploit themselves and so they go in and bomb, set afire or just gun down the citizens of that country.
Now resistance fighting makes since. Say you have 300,000 troops who come in to your country from another country. They tell you that they want to get rid of all the bad people in your country but in the process they kill about 1/5 of your total population consisting of some of the most friendly, unarmed people you have. They destroy your homes and business' and this goes on for over two years. You're starting to wonder what kind of good these people are doing. They tell you that after this "war" is over with they will rebuild your country with the help of a few friends. But written in the fine print is a side note saying they will have control of all exports and natural resources coming out of your homeland. So, getting a few dozen of your friends together and arming yourselves starts to make since. After all, you want to maintain control of your homeland.

Answer 9

i do i meani hate bush he is an idiot. but i do give him credit for saying we are gonna go over there after we were attack on 9-11. osama binladen hit us at the american embyssy in africa and hit a couple of our war ships and clinton let it slide.... but i find it kind of funny that his dad had complications with iraq during his term and all of a sudden so did bush jr asa he got his power. we are too unorganized over there. why are we having so much trouble with a hindu army?this in not comming from my ***. these are the words of other soilders besides myself.how cant we find a six foot arab on a dyalisis machine???we should have acted sooner in the clintonterm and we would not be in so deep.bush as run every company he was on the board on into the ground and look.... the most powerful country in the world is heading right for the ground too.

Answer 10

I think the terrorist are getting the upper hand , because their one mission on earth is to create ha-vac around the world and it appears that its just beginning. Specially since they are getting funded by other terrorist countries that have a heck of allot of oil.