Yes we need to eliminate all Muslim activities.
Their religious ideals can not be tolerated.
If we had a satanic cult sacrificing people who are willing to be a sacrifice, we'd stop that in a second.
I see no difference from that religion and this one.
2007-07-13 12:02:15
·
answer #1
·
answered by Deaf Bug 4
·
2⤊
1⤋
It's really easy to say, "All we have to do is declare war and defeat the terrorists," but the reality is much different and far more complicated.
What folks need to understand about the so-called "War" on Terrorism is that it can't be thought of as a "war" in the common sense. For example, in WWII, the Allies invaded Germany, defeated the Germans, and captured Berlin. It sounds simple to explain because, when you boil it all down, that's what happened in the European Theater of WWII.
The problem is that terrorists don't live in a country called Terroristland with a capital city called Terroristville that we can invade and destroy. We aren't fighting one people in one country with one set of goals. Terrorists come from all over, attack all over, and believe all kinds of different things.
A lot of it also has to do with choosing one's battles. If we went all out to war everytime something happened somewhere in the world, we'd never know peace. It's sad to say it, but sometimes a few people getting killed or wounded is not cause enough to go to war over. That's just a reality.
Now a few thousand like 9/11, that's a different story. But 6 people getting injured in a car-bomb? Britain was getting that from the I.R.A. for decades and never declared all out war on the Republic of Ireland.
Now one can make the argument that if we had been tougher under Carter or during the 80s that all of this Mid-East stuff could have been nipped in the bud. But remember that we're not dealing with the Terroristland and their leader in Terroristville. Stopping it in one place will not stop it somewhere else.
Did WWIII start in 1979? The real question of that article is "Did terrorism start in 1979?" The answer to both questions is "No."
2007-07-10 21:07:05
·
answer #2
·
answered by germankat 1
·
1⤊
2⤋
The war on terror is too small a war.
WHat made WW1 and WW2 such "GREAT" wars.. is the fact that (not only were there several countries involved, but) that so many lives were lost!
The war on terror....today??? there hasn't been more than a 1/4 million casualties.
How does that compare tot he "great Wars"???
As 'sadistic' as it sounds... the war on terror... must yield some significant casualties before... anyone in the WORLD takes particular notice.
( i suppose that is why... the iraq, afganistan, israeli wars are viewed by the World as insignificant) and NOT WORLD WARS.
interesting read... but...
i suppose.... you classified/interpreted the article incorrectly?
nice try.
2007-07-11 19:22:24
·
answer #3
·
answered by movngfwd 6
·
1⤊
1⤋
Huh? nothing in that article which is an opinion piece from the Naval captain who wrote it; states anything about world war 3... yes, you should stop hitting the snooze button .
2007-07-10 20:26:41
·
answer #4
·
answered by arus.geo 7
·
2⤊
1⤋
Yep, Islam has declared war on the west.
2007-07-10 20:32:52
·
answer #5
·
answered by drivingdog18 4
·
1⤊
1⤋
In my opinion, YES. With the attack on our embassy, Islam declared war on civilizatoin.
2007-07-10 22:35:50
·
answer #6
·
answered by yupchagee 7
·
2⤊
1⤋