Do you think that leaving Iraq and Afganistan will dissuade Terrorists in the future?

Question

I have some friends that think that if we leave Iraq and Afganistan right now that it will stop future terrorist attacks.
When I asked why, they said it would show that we want a peaceful end to things.

Considering the following attacks, along with the September 11th attacks that killed 3,000 -
I'm wondering how many people really, and truly think that if we leave, that it will all stop?

I'm not trying to start an argument, I just really am interested in knowing how many people think it will end, and why?

In 1983, the suicide attack on the Marine barracks in Beirut killed 241 American soldiers
In 1993 the first World Trade Center bombing killed 6 and injured over a thousand
The Khobar Towers bombing in Saudi Arabia killed 20 people
The Kenya embassy bombing killed 213 people and injured 5,000
The Tanzania embassy bombing killed 11 people
The USS Cole bombing killed 17 people

Take those into account, along with the 9/11 attack when considering your answer.
Thanks

Answer 1

I was never in favor of invading Iraq. But we did and crippled the country because of Bush and his neocons' arrogance. Remember how the military was to be welcomed as heroes and liberators in Iraq. I didn't like Saddam and thought he was a murderous and deceitful dictator. We can't leave Iraq and Afghanistan until both of those governments have the military training and might to defend themselves from outside arab invaders as well as quell radical terrorists that sprang up. But I agree with you that our eventually leave of Iraq and Afghanistan won't stop terrorist activities against US interests. I see the problem in two realms. First, American Foreign policy in the Middle East is the problem. Too much disconnect between our rhetoric for peace and our involvement militarily in the area. Secondly, there is an internal struggle in the Middle East related to the place of Islam in politics. In western-style democracies we try our best to separate religion from politics. In Islamic countries, the religious body is trying to rule all faucets of Muslim life.

Answer 2

I disagree with your friend's logic. However I believe the invasion of Iraq actuallly strengthened the han of the terrorists. The invasion of Afghanistan was a justified response to an actual attack, which did not give the "moral high ground" to terrorists.
Leaving Afghanistan would mean the return of the Taliban and their alliance with Al Quaida.
Leaving Iraq - the Civil war would continue, and the strongest would eventually win. But let's face it. You will eventually have to leave Iraq to let them fight it out any way. So the sooner the better.
Also, the sooner the American and British troops leave Iraq, the sooner the fantastic recruiting machine for terrorists will weaken.
Because the terrorists - or rather the manipulators who recruit them, play on stuff like what's going on in Iraq now.
You need ot respond to terrorists, but only to terrorists.

Answer 3

Leaving Iraq and Afghan will make it more difficult for peace now and in the future. The insurgents will think we are running away from our responsibilities and that we have no stomach for war. American people only want a quick victory and if this cannot be achieved then we pull out and run like we did in Viet Nam. No! Now it is time that we fight this Iraq war to a conclusion by killing all insurgents and not allowing them to reform. Getting very tough is keynote to success and we cannot act like cowards and pull out. Iraq must help us in this cause and if not then Iraq is untenable and we must leave because it will be clear that the Iraqis do not want us there. Let them try to pull their country together but you can bet it will be under Iranian leadership and this would exacerbate the situation. The way I see it is that we must force Iraqis to fight like they really meant it to save their country from Iran. They know this, but what will they do?

Answer 4

i'm hoping so. In Iraq it incredibly is barely a count number of time until eventually now that Cleric Muck-retard-el-sado, backed with the help of Iran, turns into ruler. he's in basic terms waiting for the dazzling time. In Afghanistan there is checklist opium production, and an countless supply of volenteers from Pakistan to offer the Taliban inexhaustable factors to proceed scuffling with. i'm no longer even confident why anybody is scuffling with the Taliban....they did no longer attack ny...Osama a Saudi and 19 different Saudis did. confident the Taliban my no longer be superb human beings, yet then there are a number of countries with human beings like that.

Answer 5

Their answer is wrong. I've been thinking about this issue a lot recently. If we leave Iraq, and Afghanistan, we're effectively giving in to their wants; we'd be letting them win - not only would we lose, but so would the people of Iraq, and Afghanistan.

Terrorism is the practice of using TERROR, the implied threat, or action in-order to influence others towards the terrorists goals. The terrorists goals here, or one of them is for the US to leave the region. So we can't leave, not now at least.

The extremists, not the Iraqi's and Afghan's, but the ones who chant death to the non-believers, death to America... they are the ones we're at war with. Do you really think a group of people with such extreme beliefs would stop their war just because we stop ours?

Terrorism is 4th generation warfare. It's the practice of targeting the decision makers, and making them doubt their decisions. Making them doubt the war efforts, and their validity. Before this generation was the practices of targeting factories, then supply lines and 1st generation where there were front lines and men met face to face. So if we allow for them to influence us into leaving the region, we will have lost the war.

Answer 6

I think actually going after the terrorists is the only thing that will stop them... and that means going into syria, lebanon, Pakistan, maybe Iran, and maybe even saudi...

taking out the leadership and cutting off the head...

Iraq and Afghanistan really don't factor in very much now that we've pushed al-queda out of Afghanistan...

it's like if I chase a rat out of my garage and I see it run into the house... but I stay in the garage and don't chase it because I'm afraid it will come back into the garage... staying in the garage doesn't really help kill it... and that's the only way to stop it...

just kill the rat where ever it goes... then it's done...

I mean, you're not doing anything about terror now in Afghanistan and Iraq...

you go after the groups that did the attacks you mention and kill them all... al-queda mainly... maybe hezbollah...

Answer 7

no it wont.
what u must understand is that the terrorists have the same political theories as all the western countries when it comes to achieving their political goals.They believe in the right to use violence.
If for arguments sake cuba was the superpower of the world and wanted to exploit american resources for its own interests,financed a political movement that would divert american resources to cuba ,would there be any resistance to cuba?ofcourse there would.some of the resistance would be violent.Parts of the evangelical church would have a militant outlook and there would be a 'holy resistance'.
take into account-
guatemala
panama
cuba
iraq
vietnam
afghanistan[during soviet era]
America has interfered,backed violent groups[ira]for the benefit of american economy.It supperts miltary,royal dictators in saudi arabia,pakistan,egypt,jordan.Ofcourse there will be terrorists who will also believe in there right to use violence to break free from american interests.
in the future there will be a new superpower and new terrorists.And so history will repeat itself.

Answer 8

There's far more to it than that. These are the same people who have carried out attacks in Europe and Russia, and are slaughtering people by the hundreds of thousands in Sudan.

It's a religious fight, and it won't end until they've been destroyed or we've converted. I'm not ready to convert.. are you?

Answer 9

If you leave out the 2 WTC attacks,all the other attacks were in places we do not belong and are not wanted. I do not think they actually meet the definition of terrorist attacks.

Our country has a history of forcing our people onto the lands of people who can not stop us and then we complain when they fight back. Notice how we do not force our ways on china and Russia, because those guys can fight back.

Answer 10

When we leave with our tail between our legs, they will be greatly encouraged. Seriously, we either crush them like the Roman Empire did the Greeks and Egyptians, or we cease to be able to run our own show.