The best way for America to win the war on terror is to vote out of office all of the evil neoconservatives in the Democratic and Republican parties.
2006-09-10 06:10:34 · 14 answers · asked by Anonymous in Politics & Government ➔ Politics
And the question is?
2006-09-10 06:25:09 · answer #1 · answered by Tofu Jesus 5 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Terrorism is caused by an ideology.
When you attack countries people they WILL retaliate.
Contrary to what most people think 9/11 was a reaction. Perhaps it was because americans were ignorant of what their country was doing in the Middle east. Perhaps they didnt know their country supports facists, police state regimes such as Saudi arabia, jordan and egypt. Perhaps they didnt know Isralei weapons have turned palestine into rubble. Perhaps they didnt know FOR EVERY ACTION THERE IS A REACTION.
Lets hope they do NOW. It will stop terrorism GURANTEED.
2006-09-10 06:17:30 · answer #2 · answered by rimrocka 3 · 2⤊ 1⤋
The answer is ironically simple - stop killing innocent people in Palestine, Afghanistan and other moslem lands, and I think that would be a good start.
Any party willing to do that will solve the problem over the longer term. Bear in mind, that the only the "terrorists" have offered a truce, whereby we have offered only but war and more wars.
Shameful.
2006-09-10 06:19:07 · answer #3 · answered by OAIS1 2 · 2⤊ 0⤋
As it stands we have yet to drop 'nukes' on the middle east. Unless you are talking about DU weapons. But that is another story.
The main point is, the best way to stop terrorism would be to stop being the world's number one terrorist.
2006-09-10 06:33:14 · answer #4 · answered by n0n0stalgia 1 · 0⤊ 0⤋
you won't have the ability to, a minimum of no longer via militarily would on my own. i'm no longer a pacifist, yet you won't have the ability to win a war on what a individual makes a decision to do at any any given 2nd in time. The term "war on Terror" is merely undeniable stupid. i be attentive to the right thank you to have a war on a rustic, yet how are you able to've a war on an action? The "war on drugs" is yet another stupid term. The "war on XYZ" is in basic terms a slogan it relatively is hassle-free to sell to simpletons who have no extreme thinking skills. it relatively is merely an excuse for GW to get the great funds $ he needs to maintain our militia and private contractors over there. via the way, I artwork with a girl who has a son there as a contractor that works alongside the warriors networking computers. She mentioned he makes over 150K for doing the precise comparable ingredient by using fact the warriors who make approximately 25K. a lot for that LIE that categorical human beings make with reference to the internal maximum sector continually being so a lot extra effective and competitively priced than the government. yet, I digress. yet, there is a thank you to get the better hand in this. yet, it extremely is merely no longer politically appropriate. and that's via infiltarating the mosques with spies and insect the crap out of each and all of the places the place the inciters assemble. locate out who they are and then 86 'em. additionally, make it so the kinfolk of the guy who blew themselves up has to reimburse the victims. And in the event that they might't, they unfastened each and everything. Their domicile, vehicles, $, their little ones are taken away to be "re-knowledgeable". additionally, they might desire to take the remains of the bomber or terrorist and place them contained in the sewer device, so as that they won't get a "ideal" burial. ultimately, they might desire to make it a dying sentance crime to sell or glorify the terrorists interior the rustic of Iraq. do no longer you merely love the crap that GW positioned us in. What a moron. I constructive desire the Republican celebration can furnish us an more advantageous candidate next time. I keep in mind Hanity saying how undesirable it would be to get Kerry. properly, i do no longer see how he would have completed any worse. Infact, I in all probability would vote for him if I knew what I do now. All that $ spent would have bailed out social risk-free practices in all probability many cases over.
2016-09-30 13:18:30 · answer #5 · answered by alia 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Middle east should be changed as soon as possible, politically and geographically. Also we should think more on the role of Ara bi soedia and Turkey for developing terror.
2006-09-10 06:17:40 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋
I love it when people "answer" their own "questions"!!!
It shows a level of intellectual attainment that I can only hope to achieve if I work very hard at it for many years.
Keep up the good work!
2006-09-10 06:19:23 · answer #7 · answered by Walter Ridgeley 5 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Where's Osama Bin Laden?
2006-09-10 06:20:09 · answer #8 · answered by Mysterio 6 · 2⤊ 0⤋
That will only stop the domestic terror. But it's a good start.
2006-09-10 06:12:38 · answer #9 · answered by coragryph 7 · 2⤊ 3⤋
worry about you own country and it's government. We'll do the same.
2006-09-10 07:07:25 · answer #10 · answered by rikv77 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋