Can any war on terror be won?

Question

Surely the only way to beat 'terrorists' is to crush their foundation or the support for their ideology, rather than just bombing the hell out of civilian popluations who happen to live in the same country as the terrorists.

I was just wondering whether all-out military might is the way to beat a terrorist threat. This question is not specifically aimed at the present 'war on terror', but is a general query that can be applied to any conflict between a nation and a guerrila organisation, eg, the US in Vietnam, the British in Northern Ireland etc etc.

Can I have an informed view (in simple language) please? Thanks!

Answer 1

Yes, if we have Jack Bauer in reality.

Answer 2

Well, I believe it can be won, and I do think it will take a combination of brute force as well as through covert methods that we will never know about. The current war on terror is and example of that.

The problem with a WoT is that it's not confined to just one country or group of countries. The terrorists are highly mobile, and literally could strike anytime, anywhere. That's why we have to have a two-fold approach to combating this evil. We are combating regimes that support and promote terrorism, with a by product being that the oppressed people of those countries are being liberated. The capture of Hussein has saved countless thousands of lives.

Yet the covert operations are every bit as vital. Had these covert ops not been in play, the terrorists caught in Canada and in London may very well have been able to pull off their plans. That is not even mentioning who knows how many we'll never hear about.

The third option is that we need to stop the flow of oil money going into the countries that support the radical islamofascists. If we stop buying their oil, they suddenly lose the billions flowing into their country, and they lose their primary funding sources for the weaponry and training that need financing.

The thing is, the WoT must be won. Losing is simply not an option. If we lose, then the world loses.

Answer 3

Short answer: no, not by the military. We can win the hearts and minds of people in many countries and isolate the crazy ones to the point that support for their ideologies die with time. I do not think terrorists could have caused us all this grief without have many sympathizers that wittingly or unwittingly helped fund this insanity. The world has problems and they could be solved. Unfortunately dialog and diplomacy do not seem to be as popular as this other side of radicalism by leaders like Mr. Bush and his faith-based presidency. More unfortunate history tells us that logic will not prevail till so many would have suffered or died because of the radicals and the faith-driven lunatics on both sides of this conflict. Do you really think you can plant "democracy" in a country by sending a foreign army to enforce it? We miss a leader like Eike who, long ago, was aware of the destructive force of industrialist-military compound on the American nation.

Answer 4

You can't win a war on terror. Terrorism exists because people want to achieve something they can't get by other means. If you attack them, that gives them more grievances. Every time you kill a terrorist, you recruit half a dozen more.

Some terrorist organisations are purely criminal and exist to line their own pockets. Most exist to fight back against states that they think have terrorised them (like the IRA and Al Qaeda). The only solution to terrorism is dialogue.

The nations currently feeling the effects of terrorism are mostly those who have used similar techniques themselves. The British (who do you think invented concentration camps and the various crimes committed in the name of Empire), the US (just ask any Native Americans - and do you think "Shock and Awe" isn't terrorism) and Israel (how do you think the current Israeli state came about).

Answer 5

But the problem with that apporach is that one man's terrorist is another man's freedom fighter.

To some Osama is a near-deity for "standing up" to America and in a total annihilation of that organization, could be breeding a more violent and vicious organization to take its place as others rally to the cause.

The War on Terror can be won, but not with sheer might alone

Answer 6

It all depends which side you're on, who is seen as the oppressed, and the oppressor.

The most inflammatory language was used by Bush, 'you're either with us, or against us'. Giving no room for neutrality.

The terrorists are all underground factions which need to be taken out strategically. Using military strikes and air bourne missiles, regardless of civillian safety and fatalities, only fuels animosity.

It won't be won using the present policy.

But then it was never about terror. 'Theres black liquid gold beneath them thar sands....'

And plenty of money to be made for the arms industry.

Answer 7

I don't believe it all can be irradicated, but I believe it could be kept in check, that is, if all countries band together and are continually alert to stop it from spreading.

The problem is that terrorism is funded by the rich and to gain people to their cause they first devestate them and then help them with money. It's all about money. Maybe if the world switches to alternative fuel and certain areas run out of the fuel now used there may be a change, but no "big" change will happen in "our" generation.

The bible tells of 1,000 years of peace and people are depending on that.

Answer 8

I dont believe a "War" on Terror can be won, because war creates hate and hate CREATES more terrorists. We will put and end to terrorists if we support economic and social reforms that will help make their way of life better.

Answer 9

No, you can't make war on a noun!
That's not meant to be a flippant comment, I'm serious, what we have here is a slogan, not a policy. Bush and other leaders seem to have a plethora of side-agendas driving their military and political decisions.

Answer 10

No it cannot because war is terrorism at its finest. A "war" on violence would have more effect because that would address the "cause" of terrorism, not just the effect. Acts of terrorism are the result of injustice. Stop that and you stop the violence.

Answer 11

the only solution for the civilised world is to come together and isolate all the islamic nations alltogether so that they are not able to lay their dirty hands on the innocent citizens..