Which is a better way to fight the war on terror:?

Question

A) Invading every country that may or may not have terrorists?

B) Using US intelligence agencies, Homeland security & military Speical forces?

(FYI: US intelligence agencies have stopped every terrorist plot against the US since 9/11)

Answer 1

Stop bullying others. Otherwise US enemies would grow like mushrooms

Answer 2

The best way to fight the war on terror is for the Federal Government to put in place Tariffs to protect what is left of the United States, rebuild our own country's infa-structure and actually govern our own American people instead of trying to make the world safe for corporate conglomerates and killing people half way around the world. We must strengthen the United States not weaken others.

We will not win with agression so take a page out of the EU operating hand book. They took over Europe with $$$$ not bullets and took Africa even quicker (the AU). They are in the process of taking over the U.S. and without a major change in political policy the United States will not recover from the past 25 years of neo-con subversion. The loss of jobs and movement of factories overseas is a symptom. The Federal policy that allowed such "business tactics" is the real war on terror, not radical Islam or Timothy McViegh.

For two hundred years, America was a free country. (apply this example to any aspect of the economy you are familiar with) Example: If you make a shoe in China and pay 10 cents for labor and another makes a shoe in the U.S. and pays a dollar of labor, then both of you sell you shoes in the American market (sell to the American public) there is a 90 cent deficit created. Prior to Reagan the federal government put a 90 cent tariff on the lower priced import, and said "it's a free country, make you product where ever you want", but if you sell it here, you pay the tariff. Most shoe makers chose to make their shoes where they sold them, and for 200 years the United States of America was the greatest country on the planet. Reagan ended that, and Clinton put nails in the coffin with NAFTA and GATT.

We need a Federal government who govens the American people, not the rest of the world. The WTO may end up the new world order, but as long as people like the blogbaba exist, there is hope for Truth, Justice and the American way.

I always wanted a shield like the one Captian America had, it was a given it was "MADE IN AMERICA".

Answer 3

You could have just said choice A was: invade every country on earth.
That doesn't sound very intelligent to me. If these are the only 2 choices, then B is better.
Also, it isn't 100% true that they have stopped every terrorist plot against the US. They have stopped all on US soil, but not in foreign countries.

But I still think this is a stupid question. The choices you gave were
A) Invade every country on earth
or
B) Use intelligence

I don't see much of a choice.

Answer 4

How about a jobs creation program?

I saw on CNN that in Irak, terrorism is the best employer. You get US$ 5,000 for placing a bomb, US$ 1,000 for taking pictures of the explosion, and US$ 20,000 imagine for becoming a kamekazee ! Young people in those countries see no better employment perspectives than becoming a terrorist! It's like poor Colombians becoming drug mules to earn a living...

Answer 5

D) Stop electing terrorists to government office. If any of you read 1984, you would recognize the policies being enacted. Try not invading a sovereign nation to put up a government you like.
If that happened in every civilized nation, we would have been wiped out years ago.

Answer 6

How about not invading countries which never posed a threat to you, Chuckles? (i.e.: Iraq.)

(FYI: US intelligence agencies have stopped every terrorist plot against the US since 9/11)

Suuuuure they have, dum-dum! Suuuure they have...! lmao

Answer 7

This may sound simple but I would pour some pig blood on all of the graves of the dead terrorists ,publicly And make it known that was going to be standard procedure from now on with any and all insurgents

Answer 8

Terrorism cannot be stopped with bullets. The only logical way to attack this global problem is through cooperative police work; combining the intelligence and information resources worldwide.

Answer 9

Of course B. But raw power is not to underestimated either. During WWII, when are enemies went into a church, we did not attack it, but if they fired upon us from the church, we would level the church. If we would level a mosque when used to fire upon us, it would send a powerful message, and they would not get access to them in the future. We are not using our strength in the right ways because we do not want to offend anyone, but we wind up offending everyone making intelligence gathering even more difficult.

Answer 10

It was because of "B" that the plot for 9/11 was first uncovered, which was then ignored. So, I stick with "B"

Of course, some say let's give them all Coca Cola and McDonalds...

Answer 11

"War on terror" is a meaningless phrase used to inflame your emotions instead of your using cold hard reason.

Terror is not a physical enemy you can declare war on. Terror is an emotion. You are personally responsible for every one of your emotions. If you are unable to own your emotions then you need therapy, not a declaration of war.

A war must be declared against some actual entity such as a state. The attack of 9/11 was a crime, not an act of war. Responding to it by calling it a war is just a way to seize more control over the American people. It is supposed to glorify an incompetent leader by enabling him to call himself a "wartime president".

Neither is there such a thing as a "war on terrorism". Terrorism is a tactic adopted by a combatant weak in other weaponry. Sane people do not declare a war on a mere tactic.

The phrase "war on" things, has been made meaningless by over use. LBJ stated it with his "war on poverty". Then we had the "war on drugs". Now it's the "war on terror". *Yawn*.

Let's declare a war on the misuse of the English language. Let's declare a war on politicians who try to manipulate us by stirring our emotions with their words of passion instead of words of reason. Just kidding, of course. Sane rational people do not run around declaring war on things instead of calmly dealing with them.

And declaring a war is NOT a right of the president. It is the responsibility of Congress.