What is the goal of the war on terror, given that the eradication of it is impossible?

Answer 1

The "War on Terror" is just a tag line to help further the agendas of a small corrupt group of people. They don't care much about terrorists.

What have we done about Bin Laden? Nothing. There are almost no resources on that loser compared to Iraq and Afganistan Wars.

Answer 2

Eradication is impossible, but minimization isn't.
WorldWar's answer discusses Rummie's saying if he had it to do over again, he wouldn't call it a war. That seems a quite intelligent answer. He knew going in we'd be fighting a 4th generation war. The American people still define war in the way some in the military think of as 3d generation. Public expectations are those of their grandparents, and they will not be met. The way we can lose is, as in Vietnam, if we win even everything over there but lose public support, we lose. As yet few civilians have read Col. Hammes' "The Sling and the Stone" or similar military thinkers. Not even much of the Pentagon have grasped the concept, and the President certainly isn't going to supplant Reagan as "The Great Communicator." Until we realize what kind of war we are fighting we will be at a serious disadvantage.Clausewitz pointed out the importance of leaders' knowing what kind of war they were fighting. In democratic society in the information age, they must communicate this to the public. The type of war is known. Winning doctrine is known. Not knowing that we know is the failure.

Answer 3

Rumsfeld: ‘It Is Not A War on Terror'

AFP | December 12, 2006

In a new interview posted on Townhall.com, conservative columnist Cal Thomas asks outgoing Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld, “With what you know now, what might you have done differently in Iraq?” Rumsfeld offers a remarkable response :

I don't think I would have called it the war on terror. I don't mean to be critical of those who have. Certainly, I have used the phrase frequently. Why do I say that? Because the word ‘war' conjures up World War II more than it does the Cold War. It creates a level of expectation of victory and an ending within 30 or 60 minutes of a soap opera. It isn't going to happen that way. Furthermore, it is not a ‘war on terror.' Terror is a weapon of choice for extremists who are trying to destabilize regimes and (through) a small group of clerics, impose their dark vision on all the people they can control. So ‘war on terror' is a problem for me.

Rumsfeld not only used the phrase ‘war on the terror'; he repeatedly criticized anyone who questioned the validity of it.

– “[T]here has been comment in the press of late about whether or not we're even engaged in a war on terror, or whether our purpose might be better explained in a different manner. Let there be no mistake, we are a nation at war, against terrorist enemies who are seeking our surrender or our retreat. It is a war.” [8/2/05]

– “I would like to say that Iraq is really one of the battle grounds in the global war on terror.” [4/24/06]

– “Iraq is the central front of the global war on terror.” [12/16/05]

– Q: My argument is that we are fighting the war on terror in Iraq. Back me up a little bit on that, Mr. Secretary.

RUMSFELD: Well, you're absolutely right. [8/3/04]

– “[Iraq is] part of the global war on terror; let there be no doubt.” [9/10/03]

– Q: Do you feel that the Administration by turning its attention onto Iraq would be leaving the job undone a bit too soon?
RUMSFELD: Oh, no. Indeed that's part of the global war on terrorism, Iraq. [12/4/02]

Rumsfeld's outgoing memo on Iraq - which calls for a “major adjustment” in strategy - makes no mention of the one thing he would have “done differently” on Iraq.

Answer 4

It should be obvious to anyone who has more brains then a rock or democrats. We have tied up the biggest exporters of terror (Iran and Syria) with action in Afghanistan and Iraq. Has there been any more attacks here since 9/11? No.....then I guess it is a success. He's (Bin Laden) on the run, he has limited money and has spent most of his time trying to stay alive. Again check a website called theotheriraq.com and see something CNN will not report.

Answer 5

The "war on Terror" is really a war on religious fanatics and they are attempting to remove the "BRAINS" which will NEVER HAPPEN because the number is just growing.

Just a note, the annoying, bigoted and TOTALLY uninformed answers from KIDS being supported by their parents makes me just want to bail from this whole forum. Please do your homework and STFU!

Poverty breeds IGNORANCE and a desire to find a better life; either "HERE" or the after life.

If your children were living off of cock roaches cooked in a piece of newspaper that was set afire and someone offered to send them to college and TAKE care of yuor FAMILY for life, do you suppose that you would walk into a crowded market place and pull a string that blew EVERYTHING UP?

No matter what the religion or culture, ALL parents want BETTER for their children and are willing to make the sacrafice to achieve that goal. They pull the string and they become a HERO. Their BELIEFS make it acceptable with the benefits.

In NAM young women would actually wrap a contact bomb in the blanket with their baby and throw it out of a bus window. AMERICAN troops would instinctitivly try to catch the baby for obvious reasons and would be BLOWN to pieces for their GALANT efforts.

The problem that we have is a LAME attempt to FORCE our way of life on a people that can NOT even comprend what we offer and there are HUGE cultural and religious differences to overcome.

My feeling is that we eliminate the key guys and then let them sort it out on their own; If you want to spend the rest of your life under a tyrant then DO NOTwhine when he / she acts like a tyrant.

CORRUPTION is RAMPANT because that is their way and we are NOT going to change that by shooting people and attempting top change them to OUR way of LIFE.

I just figure, GET OUT and let them sort it out on their OWN.

The OIL and stability of the REGION is a BIG DEAL because that is an EASY way to bring us to our knees.

If we would just devote our money and intellectual resourses to finding a way to get free of petrol then we would be FREE AGAIN.

We are the MOST POWERFUL country in the world and that brings ETHICAL responsibilities, see DAFUR, African drought and the HOMELESS through out the WORLD

You just do NOT fix those problems with bullets and IMPOSING your WILL on countries that just do NOT UNDERSTAND.

High school KIDS PLEASE stay OUT of SERIOUS POSTS unless you have something REALLY positive to contribute. Stay in the relationships forumand talk about "Why he /she doesn't like me or ask me out stuff". You have the knowledge and experience to add value.

Happy Holidays, SCREW IT...MERRY CHRISTMAS!

J

Answer 6

War on terror is now to be addressed by our local police also. Its no longer a problem for our military. The local police have to protect us from being blown up while traveling in metros and planes. We need good intelligence. We all have to fight it together. We have to be more careful in our daily lives.

Answer 7

Judging from the environment in the Middle East, the war on terror is a preparation for WW3.

No one can forsee what is going to happen in times of WW3.

Answer 8

There is a terror network with bases of operation, "factories," labs, schools and financing. These are the targets the U.S. wants to eliminate.

Answer 9

Just slowing it down works for me. It is like a big ball & will just move faster unless we put some obstacles in front of it. I think we have slowed it down since 9/11. Look at France - they pulled out to save themselves & they get more attacks than any country. The US has been attack free since 9/11.

Answer 10

To drive more people to rage, create bigger outside enemy, an enemy that never goes away and can be created anywhere. Viola you can make any laws domestically and attack anyone internationally. The best of both worlds.