it will be difficult for we have a clash of ideologies. it is hard when the young of the terrorist are being taught hate and that killing monkeys (Jews) have no soul. this is how many thought of slaves and justified their 'peculiar institution' as you have to have euphemisms to make such behavior acceptable.
the use cartoons, praise and deception to make their children accept dying and killing in the name of their god.
i recently saw where the Saudie's, yes i said saudies, are experimenting with therapy for young people arrested for terrorist activites several interviewed stated how sad they were that they were trained to hate and take lives so easiely. one also stated that now he knows he is the true muslim and that the terrorists are not..i am paraphrasing but it was encourging.
also others, are beginning to see that for their children to have any hope of a future, people will have to learn to work togther as war benefits no one.
wafta sultan is a well known author and therapist has written a book on the issues, so i do remain hopeful but it will be a long process and many will die until then.
"The clash we are witnessing around the world is not a clash of religions, or a clash of civilizations. It is a clash between two opposites, between two eras. It is a clash between a mentality that belongs to the Middle Ages and another mentality that belongs to the 21st century. It is a clash between civilization and backwardness, between the civilized and the primitive, between barbarity and rationality. It is a clash between freedom and oppression, between democracy and dictatorship. It is a clash between human rights, on the one hand, and the violation of these rights, on other hand. It is a clash between those who treat women like beasts, and those who treat them like human beings. What we see today is not a clash of civilizations. Civilizations do not clash, but compete." by Wafta Sultan
2007-08-22 15:26:59
·
answer #1
·
answered by ? 7
·
2⤊
0⤋
Well, it depends on what you mean by won. Can we ever completely end it? Absolutely not.
But remember, terrorism has existed in past years and it has not been seen as a serious threat to world stability. Most terrorist movements tended to be local: the IRA, the Basque Separatists, Red Brigade, Shining Path--all were regionally focussed.
The creation of a broader, generalized terrorism manufactured through Al Qaeda is something new. It took a number of regionally diverse terrorist organizations which held in common a rough interest in fundamentalist Islamism and created a loosely confederated network.
That presents a much more complex and difficult terrorism than has existed before. But I don't think it is unsurmountable. With size and organization also comes certain weaknesses.
First, it is a kind of terrorism that is increasingly dependent on money to operate. By going after the sources of finances, one can very effectively hobble the ability of terrorist organizations to function. Were it me, I would be spending considerable more resources in disrupting the mother's milk of these groups. That would include seizure of funds, active prosecution of middle me, destroying electronic financial networks, etc.
A second way to effectively address terrorism is to undercut the reasons for their formation. For example, had the Bush administration put as much money and effort into settling the Palestinian-Israeli conflict, there would be considerable benefits in many regards, including an important cause célebre for terrorism. Or instead of spending billions in Iraq, we might have helped Pakistan restore their public school system and lessen the influence and power of fundamentalist religious schools (madrasas), which have risen to fill the gap.
Finally, attack those things that create the loose alliance of these groups. Isolate certain regions and movements from the broader interest in Islamic conservatism. This might be accomplished through targeted military action, but also through emphasising the differences between specific regional interests and internationalist goals. What does the PLO has to do with Malaysian revolutionaries, for example?
Will these things stop terrorism? Of course not. But through attacking the things that support terrorism and its root causes, it could greatly decrease the magnitude and global impact of its activities.
Cheers.
2007-08-22 15:30:56
·
answer #2
·
answered by blueevent47 5
·
2⤊
0⤋
terrorism is a battle tactic
this is a little like asking, can we win the war on global warming?
no, but we can do our best to slow it down
and, IMHO, invading Iraq and starting an another unwinable war was the stupidest thing we could have done ... now were in the same pickle as viet nam ~ accept the stakes (and the consequences) are much higher
2007-08-22 15:35:43
·
answer #3
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋
Considering terrorism is a military tactic, not a nation or even another military force, no. Our fight in Afghanistan and Iraq is against Islamic extremists. Our invasion and occupation of Iraq and Afghanistan has done more to bolster the Islamic extremists than anything else they could have hoped for. Bush was played and being greedy and power hungry he fell for it.
2007-08-22 16:05:26
·
answer #4
·
answered by ndmagicman 7
·
1⤊
0⤋
Yes we can win the War On Terrorism. Get out of Iraq, Get out of Saudi Arabia, Get out of Afghanistan, We would have no more problems with them guaranteed.
2007-08-22 16:36:11
·
answer #5
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋
The "warfare on Terror" is actual the warfare on American civil liberties. 9/11 grew to become into used to instill the "Patriot Act", and circumventing the gadget of exams and balances interior the country by skill of allowing the FBI to arrest and indefinitely detain you on being suspected of terrorism without warrant or offering a reason or information as to your involvement. it is likewise pretext for invading Afghanistan, which gave us a foot carry interior the middle-East, allowing us to efficiently invade and occupy Iraq. We have been lied to approximately WMD's, and now they desire to probably invade Iran. this could provide us administration over the final public of the worlds oil furnish. on an identical time as all this is going on, place of start risk-free practices reported they're right here for us, no longer terrorists. The pentagon needs 4 hundred,000 troops placed in cities state element. the government efficiently bailed out people who led to the industry to drop. the only thank you to win the warfare on terror is to locate the fact approximately what started out it (9/11). My well-known, Osama Bin encumbered grew to become into on the CIA payroll till some months earlier 9/11! yet as a manner to attain any of this we could desire to look to the previous, to no longer the destiny.
2016-10-09 01:53:58
·
answer #6
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋
Isn't fighting a war on terrorism like eating your way to thinness?
Or spending your way out of debt? Or drinking until you are sober?
And why don't others see these things, so plain in front of our collective noses?
2007-08-22 15:38:19
·
answer #7
·
answered by Anonymous
·
1⤊
0⤋
So, is your position to not even try, and let them throw jets at our buildings, car-bombs at our cities? Unfortunately, life is not a Football / Baseball / Hockey game, where there is some predetermined "end" time to achieve victory, or accept defeat. In life, if you believe in your "way", then you accept that you may fight a losing battle, but you don't give up. The Islamists can have America, or my little 1/3rd acre of it, when they pry the gun from my cold, red-blooded , dead hand.
- The Gremlin Guy -
2007-08-22 15:13:59
·
answer #8
·
answered by Anonymous
·
2⤊
0⤋
Do you really believe that this war, that has had a thousand names is really about terrorism? We have terrorist right here how do we stop them?
A trick question for a trick question
2007-08-22 15:18:35
·
answer #9
·
answered by Anonymous
·
1⤊
0⤋
so how do you fight a war agaist an extreme political or religous belief?!!!
crusade and conquere?!!!
you think osama is the only one spreadin it around?!!!
is there a main headquarters were lookin for?!!!
if we capture osama and hang him is the game over?!!!
should we just stay at war until whoever says "ok, no more hatin americans and blowin peaple up"!!!
i would like to know the answere also!!!
but hey, im told that what were doin is workin , so i guess thats all i got to go on, and since i dont want to sound unpatriotic, i guess i just have to say go ahead and keep on doin what your doin with my full support, until im told that the game is over!!!
2007-08-22 16:16:47
·
answer #10
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋