In all honesty, could there have been a better way to fight terrorism than what we are doing?

Question

Could we have spent the money for better results and less waste?

Answer 1

Since our efforts have resulted in more terrorist recruits then before I would say we could have done something else to get better results. Fortunately, I am not "the decider" since I have no idea what should have happened as opposed to what did. I think extremists have been around longer than our nation so we probably don't have much of a chance of changing things too much.

Answer 2

In all honesty......The recent state of politics in the United States is to form a global economy and to be control of this economy. The current 'War on Terror' has less to do with terror than defending our current business interest in the Middle East. Our government has been hijacked by high paid lobbyists and the 'law makers' who are in their pockets.. We are no longer a government of and for the people; we are now living in a fascist state controlled by big oil, pharmaceutical and other business interests. This will continue until the populace decides to take control of our government back (revolution).

The reason for the terrorism we are experiencing is that we are coming to the end of the oil economy. Global oil companies know that the oil reserves are not sustainable and will do anything to keep the profit and power they now enjoy. The last untapped oil reserves lie in the areas we are now fighting in.

The problem we face now however is the growing industrialization and oil consumption of other countries (China and India) that are also competing for the limited oil reserves. The United States (as the largest oil consumer) has a very large stake in maintaining control in the regions where oil exists so military intervention was necessary to preserve our dominance in the region.

How to fight terrorism....and how we could have better spent the money....How about investing the billions of dollars and countless man hours spent to fight the ‘War to Preserve Oil Dominance' (sorry that is (War On Terror) in the development of alternative renewable fuel sources. Only when we become energy self reliant will we be able to pull out of the region. Once we pull out of the region, exploitation of the region’s population will end and we can leave the terrorists to fight their religious jihad amongst themselves. That is the honest way to fight terrorism.

Answer 3

Absolutely. Given the size and reach of the terrorist organization, military action has to e a component--but it should be focused on disabling these organizations and facititating nonmilitary measures (example: going into Afghanistan was logical--but that should have remained the focus

But--basically, terrorism is a tactic--we need to stop demonizing these groups and start understanding why they exist and deal with the problems that cause them. I'll use Lebanon as a case--it's an especially clear example--but the basic pattern holds everywhere:

At the end of the '90s Israel pulled out of Lebanon. But neithr they nor the West moved into the region with aid and economic development--leaving some 1-2 million Lebanese incentral/south Lebanon in poverty. What "investment" did occur consisted of oceanfront resorts in Beirut and the like--foreign owned. That did nothing for the bulk of the Lebanese people.

Hezbollah moved into the vacuum. Not as a "terrorist group (though they most certainly are) but as a political organization. They opened health clinics, schools, provided humanitarian aid. Purely to serve their own ends, yes. But for the Lebanese, they were the only ones who did not abandon them. So they gained widespread popular support.

Then, last year, Hezbollah kidnapped 2 Israeli soldiers--and Israel quite properly responded with force, as they had every right todo. BUT--instead of focused, selective strikes against Hezbollah, Israel used a "scorched earth" policy that forced a half-million Lebanese out of hteir homes, killed more than a thousand--and didn't dislodge Hezbollah or get the soldiers back (their release came via diplomacy).

But now Hezbolllah is more popular and stronger than ever--and is making a good try at gaining political control in Lebanon.

The point: "terrorist groups" are political organizations that happen to use terrorism as a tactic. They get their base of support--and places to hide, work, organize--when populations of ordinary people are decimated by war and poverty, are oppressed or abandoned--when people are without hope and desperate.

If we want to end terrorism--mve in and invest in these people--with schools, capital for small businesses, education. That's what the West--and especially the US--does better than anyone else in the world. If we try to compete with the terrorists on their terms--guns and bombs in the streets--we will lose. If we makethemcompete on OUR terms--bringing hope, opportunity, prosperity by investing in the ordinary person--not just expensive resorts on a beach--we will win--every time.

And--like most thing s when you do them right--we will benefit in more ways than security. This is what we did follwing WW2--and we've made back the money we invested in Japan and the Marshall plan many times over, even though that wasn't the point or goal of the efforts.

Answer 4

I doubt it, and here's why: We don't know which rocks the terrorists are hiding under. Terrorists do not have an organized government creating their military.

The wisest course to fight terrorism is to stop the cycle that breeds it, since we don't know where all of them live. Terrorist extremism thrives where there is poverty and misery and oppression, which is common throughout the middle east. The best way to stop oppression is to replace it with freedom. The best method to bring freedom equally to all people is through democracy.

Do you think it was a mistake that Iraq sits smack in the middle of Syria and Iran? Do you believe for a moment that Libya would have voluntarily disarmed their nuclear program if we had not caught Saddam Hussein? The geographical genius of invading Iraq means that we defeat terrorism where it lives. The people fighting terrorism will be our trained and gifted military, instead of defenseless citizens on their way to work.

For that matter, the defeat of terrorism in its own territory also means the psychological defeat of a sick ideology. For people to visibly see terrorists lose in their own country sends a powerful message to the rest of those with the bully mentality.

The media is woefully ignorant due to their bias and hatred of a republican president who they think is 'stupid'. Do not let them guide your ideas of 'efficiency' when it comes to fighting a war. The Democrats and the anti-war crowd are not well schooled in warfare either, and I've yet to see a plausible 'solution' that does not expose us to more threats. They offer plenty of criticism with no real solutions. I believe that America will prevail, because our military is superior and we are doing the right thing over there. It may take a while, but compared to other wars, we're doing great.

Answer 5

Peace comes about not by oppressing the population but by feeding its infinite desires.
The Islamic world main desire is to rid itself of western influence and oppression so it is kind of a catch-22.
We really need to stop interfearing in their daily politics and stop our governments from doing whatever we are doing that allows their religious leaders to breed such intense hatred to the point of martyrdom.
If our governments would stay out of their business, then and only then would it have a chance to subside. Terrorism is fueled by oppression and feeling of others in total control of ones life with no normal means of change.
Terrorism cannot be stopped as long as one person is willing to die for their belief of this and their are hundreds of thousands that believe this.
First stop the meddling and then it would be easy to sort out the fanatics who are not really about their cause as much as they are looney and they would have no funding and instruction.

Answer 6

You think? Most Islamic nations struggle with the extremist elements within their borders. We can offer support to the moderate elements within those nations to try to minimize the influence of radicals, as we do in Pakistan, Egypt and elsewhere. $500 billion in humanitarian aid to Palestinian refugees and other struggling Muslims around the world would have bought us enormous amounts of goodwill, instead of the hatred of the Muslim world.

Answer 7

First & preferable the fact needs to earnings WHY are we even in touch in a "conflict on terror" Is there relatively this manner of component as Al Qiada or in spite of its meant to be? like some style of boogie-guy ( as became the previous u.s. whilst the "chilly conflict" became on) we are meant to worry some hazard from the middle east? WHY? Please be conscious that there is countless information that factors to the shown fact that NO airliners have been hijacked on 9/11/2001 WE the folk have been lied to! awaken u . s . a . of america!

Answer 8

Yeah, we could have. Easiest answer would be to get Osama and finish the campaign in Afghanistan. Catching their leader would have dealt them a serious blow to their morale.

Answer 9

Sure.

Every American in the U.S.A. could have sat up in a tree and watched the moon rise -- and it would have had better results.

Answer 10

Surround Iraq and let them come to us. Instead of us consistently pursuing them into their strongholds. If we are not travelling on their highways and just waiting at the borders, no IED's no roadside bombs. We just take them out as they come to us.