Is the war on terror winable?

Question

Can you root out terrorists by bombing entire countries? Will they at some point say "I give", or will they not be replaced by new terrorists if the current ones get killed?
Can you create democracy by invading and occupying countries?

Answer 1

Let's begin by recognizing that the "War on Terror" is a phrase concocted by some Karl Rove-type in the Bush administration to strike fear in the hearts and minds of voters and, hence, to accumulate more votes and more power to achieve their agenda.

The real war being waged by this administration is the invasion and occupation of Iraq -- a unilateral, imperialistic war to accrue control of oil lands and a place of power in the Middle East. That war has been badly planned, poorly implemented (not by the troops themselves but by Rumsfeld and his minions in the Pentagon), and very poorly adapted to actual conditions. But then it was a mistake from the beginning. Is that war winnable? No, or at least not without escalating into a catclysmic World War III with the US as the agressors!

Can the US military put down the insurgents in Iraq? The previous answerer demonstrated the extreme unlikelihood that even that "victory" can be achieved, and the struggle could be indefinite, expensive, and catastrophic for many of our troops as well as for unity here at home.

Now,of course, there is also a continuing struggle with terrorists -- and there likely will be for some time to come. That's not even guerilla warfare, but it's serious and difficult. It has a long history. If the Bush administation had been attending to it with care and the CIA and FBI had been effectively working together before 9/11, we just might have prevented 9/11.

Afterwards, the US had practically the whole world as allies to conduct this struggle with terrorists, much of the Islamic world as well as our European, Asian, and Latin American allies. So what did the Bush administration do?

They used 9/11 as an excuse to declare the war on Iraq that they had been envisioning ever since George I pulled out after the Kuwait conflict in the early 1990s.

So what has been the result of that arrogant miscalculation by George II and his neoconservative advisors? It has exacerbated the struggle with terrorists. What could actually have been won (or rigorously controlled) may actually now be lost (or, at least, will be out of control for a long time to come).

How has the War on Iraq affected the struggle against terrorists?

(1) Our support among allies has dissipated, so that now the US is a hated nation in many parts of the globe, even Europe and Latin America. Not American citizens, mind you, but the US government under this administration.

(2) The chance to clear Afghanistan of terrorists and to capture bin Laden has been defused--perhaps, intentionally--by redirecting resources, energies, and world attention to Iraq and the Middle East.

(3) Iraq has become a prime recruiting ground for terrorists, including but not limited to al Qaeda, and has become a motivating force used to enhance recruitment efforts by terrorists throughout the Middle East.

(4) Iranians, North Koreans, Hamas, Hezbollah, and who knows how many other countries and sects have seen that the US is not Almighty and that its leadership is not very knowledgeable about local conditions; therefore, forces opposed to US domination have arisen and become more articulate, more confident, and more dangerous.

(5) Inadequate resources and attention are being directed to homeland security, especially our ports, mass transportation, and potential targets for conventional terrorists. As far as one can tell from recent events, collaboration among various forces (FBI, CIA, Pentagon, NSA, state and local law enforcement agencies) has not been significantly improved. Witness Katrina. Witness the corruption and overspending of the Department of Homeland Security.

(6) Oil supply has been jeopardized. The oil companies are making $$$$, as well as their buddies at Halliburton, etc. Look at what's happening at gas tanks in the US. And who suffers most from that? The working poor, of course, who have been targeted victims for most of the Bush administration financial policies.

(7, and not the least important by any means) The deception, secrecy, manipulation, maneuvering, and resistance to conventional "checks and balances" and government investigations--all this has led many people in the US to be suspicious. Is there a national conspiracy to undermine our democratic republic? Is there a global conspiracy involving the Bushes and their friends, the Saud dynasty? Some people even wonder whether 9/11 was planned. Was the World Trade Center hot-wired to implode? Such rampant suspicion simply intensifies the bipolar partisanship in this country and undermines rational efforts to achieve consensus, to collaborate in solving genuine problems (like terrorism at home and abroad), and to effect meaningful compromises in other critcal areas of concern (health care, old-age benefits, global warming, environmental deterioration, electoral reform, and the like).

Is the struggle with terrorists winnable. Certainly. But it's not being won now; it's getting worse. And the successors to the Bush cabel will face a situation that has worsened during the past six years by geometric proportions.

Answer 2

whenever you are in someone elses country there are going to be forces firing on u .... just for being in their country. That will never go away unless you take over the country completely and confiscate all weapons and seal off all boarders. "Terrorism" is a point of view and it doesnt even exist concretely ... anyone that is against you for any reason can be a "terrorist" so no a war on terrorism can ever be winnable. Dont confuse a "terrorist" with an organized armed militia which is more like a standing army with a specific objective ... hezbolla is an armed militia ... Although the actions of an armed militia can be labeled terrorism they are a finite force that can be defeated . A war on "terrorism" only, is just a way to justify blowing up and killing anyone that is in the way of ur objectives ... an "insurgent" or "terrorist" isnt part of any organized group other than the local people that are against you ... unless it happens to be the fake CIA sponsored group of al-quaida .. most insurgents we kill are part of that group but they dont call anywhere home ... they can exist indefinitely as long as we have need of that "organization" ...we can wipe them out totally in one place and there will be other "cells" wherever we happen to get resistance of any kind from anybody. The war on terror is a tool and a justification ...

Answer 3

Terrorists cannot exist if they are not funded and given refuge. Lebanon has allowed Hezbollah to build up an arsenal which includes 13,000 rockets along the border with Israel. What do you think these rockets were for?

If Israel didn't counter-attack when they did, they would have to go in at some point, because Hezbollah was building up for a major terrorist offensive against the citizens of Israel.

What should the government of that Israel do, having been entrusted by its citizens to protect them?

The plan is to make harboring and supporting terrorists so costly in money and lives that Lebanon stops doing it. The other countries will not want the terrorists either because they will not want to risk a war for the sake of them. With no place to go, they will fight to the death, and then you will be rid of them.

Answer 4

Fact from fiction, truth from diction. You can believe all the hype and BS out of Washington by the buffoons and snake oil sellers running this snafu, or you can look at history. There has only been one, and I repeat, ONE insurgency that has ever been but down by military might, if you do not count the Bay of Pigs, and that was of the Khmer Rouge by the North Vietnamese Regulars. the Tamil Tigers of Sri Lanka have been fighting 25 years. The only thing that slowed them down was a tsunami. and not even that crushed them. So, to the question if rebels, insurgents, or terrorist, whatever you want to call them, replace those they loose. You tell me? They do not have 50 and 70 year old insurgents. FARC in South America has been fighting more than 17year. Have not been beaten. The Mujaheddin stalled the Soviets in Afghanistan for more than 12 year and sent the mighty soviet army packing, Same as the Viet Cong sent Uncle Sam packing. The IRA in the UK decided to lay their arms down. They were not made to do it. And the French Resistance of WWII would have fought on for years if the war had not ended the Nazi regime. So you tell me? where has military might EVER gotten rid of insurgents? Maybe some deep dark corner of Sub Saharan Africa where no one plays attention, but certainly not where the press has been looking.

Answer 5

"Can you root out terrorists by bombing entire countries?"
Yes if we boom stuff like we did in WWII.

"Can you create democracy by invading and occupying countries?"

Yes we did this with Japan and Germany in WWII.

But it is sad to say that we do not fight wars to win today like we did in WW II. It is the people that sport the Army/terrorists! As long and you do not take them out of it you can not win a war!

Answer 6

People say terrorism is an idea. You cant stop an idea. I say if you show people how bad of an idea it is they will stop. Killing every S.O.B. in Iran. Now that will show terrorism is a bad idea.

Occupying Iraq is a slow way of doing it. We need to **** or get off the pot. We need to attack the terrorists suppliers. Iran. It would start world war 3, but it needs to happen before the terrorists get a W.M.D.

Answer 7

The hard cold truth is that you can NEVER win a war on terror.

There have been terrorists since biblical times.... there have been terrorists in the middle ages....

There have been terrorists during the last 100 years...

There are terrorists today...

There will be terrorists tomorrow.

Diplomacy works better than bombs in the long run....

Terrorists are like cockroaches.... there are too many of them to get rid of...

Answer 8

There is no way to kill terrorists. At least not without killing a lot of civilians also. When they hide in mosques and with women and children.. It's virtually impossible. You kill one, and 100 more sprout out. They're like roaches.

We're finding this out in Iraq. You kill a few and 500 more sprout out of the ground.

Only sure way is to nuke the entire Middle East.. But of course that would be pretty heartless and stupid -- hundreds of millions would die -- and the Nuclear fallout would reach Europe and N. Africa -- which would cause more millions to die.

Answer 9

the only way to stop terrorists is to stop stealing

1% get 90% of world income

99% get 10% of world income

90% get 10th to 1000th of world average hourly pay

ie, full slavery

everyone including housewives and students would get US$15 an hour if everyone got the same hourly pay

we have pay from a million times average to 1000th of average

ie, maximal injustice, maximal righteous rage

escalating to extinction soon for all by nuclear winter

what you can do, if you care to survive, to be 100 times happier, safer

see my other answers here

do something responsible

check out this plan

time is short

nobility is pursuing your happiness with devotion, sincerity, intelligence, concentration, dedication, openness to learn

Answer 10

No!
Never!
No How!
Wars are fought, terrorist don't fight, they terrorize, how can you fight terrorist? they are not out in the open but instead of fighting an army they pick on the civilians, it's like someone who is like 30 yrs-old trying to pick on a 10 yr-old.