No. How do you stop a single person or a small group from doing - more or less whatever they want? .... You can't, I can't ... Nobody can.
That's the problem in a nutshell. We didn't have a rational declaration of war, we declared a war on an non-specific noun, which isn't just poor grammar, but bad national policy.
The only way to "prevent" terrorism , aside from chucking our constitution to the gutter, and performing full body checks on every citizen two times a day, regulating all movement, purchases, conversations and travel.
Doing all of these things still would only reduce terrorism to something which occurs in spite of all the measures taken rather than something that doesn't occur.
During the Civil War Lincoln had occasion at an official reception to refer to the Southerners as erring human beings rather than as enemies to be exterminated. An elderly lady, a fiery patriot, rebuked him for speaking kindly of his enemies when he ought to be thinking of destroying them. "Why, madam," said Lincoln, "do I not destroy my enemies when I make them my friends?"
Three possible outcomes, which all end the same way.
1. One of the two of groups (us or them) is dead.
2. Both of us are dead.
3. We make a peace with one another.
2007-09-10 16:41:56
·
answer #1
·
answered by Mark T 7
·
2⤊
0⤋
I saw someone answered they (terrorists) need to be converted to Christianity.
Well, IRA members are christians aren't they? Have you ever taken a look at what the Catholics and Protestants are still doing to each other in Ireland? We have "eco-terrorists" as well.
That's not the answer.
It would take a long time to get to a point where terrorism is a thing of the past.
If it were only an issue of a particular religion then perhaps we could prevent it. It is not. It is simply that there are more muslims utilizing terrorism as a tool, so most of us think of muslims first.
It could only be prevented if you are able to eradicate hatred.
Good luck with that.
2007-09-10 16:58:36
·
answer #2
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
1⤋
By the general definition of terrorism, it seems that WWI was started by terrorism (the assassination of Archduke Ferdinand).
In fact, Abraham Lincoln was killed by a terrorist. There was terrorism going on for years in Belfast, Ireland.
Terrorism, like crime, can't truly be prevented, but only responded to. If response is predictable and effective, then it would be a deterrent, and a prevention of a sort.
2007-09-10 16:37:33
·
answer #3
·
answered by Marc X 6
·
0⤊
0⤋
terrorism is a tactic!
the cause is people living in countries with NO liberty, or under a totalitarian religious extremism that brainwashes them into becoming killing robots etc, understand?
so by freeing them, and bringing democracy to those countries, you prevent terrorism and the creations of new terrorists....
and that is why we have to win in Iraq, and in Afghanistan, and change Saudi Arabia, Iran, Syria, etc, ...as long as there are countries with conditions that turns people into radicalism we will NOT stop seeing terrorism!
2007-09-10 16:38:48
·
answer #4
·
answered by Krytox1a 6
·
1⤊
0⤋
Sure it can. It needs to be treated as a capital offense. Crime doesn't pay, kiddies. Herein is the lesson.
We certainly don't need to keep fostering the Islam is the religion of peace mentality if we want to end terrorism.
2007-09-10 16:38:08
·
answer #5
·
answered by ? 7
·
0⤊
0⤋
yes, dont get involved in any war when they dont call you, help nations who need help like ruanda, uganda, darfur, and all those places where genocide is happening, dont go where noone call oyu, stop killing everyone like kids and civils, dont feed the hate in the middle eastern countries, help the little countries, dont exploit them, dont let others hate you, and then the terrorism will stop, they hate Americans not because we are giving them chocolates and flowers , we must be doing a lot of things wrong, the war in irak was not for massive destruction weapons, was for oil,make peace and terrorism will stop
2007-09-10 16:56:04
·
answer #6
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋
once you assert the U. S., I presume which you're concerning a pair of our legislators. that's a shame that politicians are in a position to conceal at the back of labels like "the government". we could flush them out, shine a spotlight on them, and divulge their activities. what's terrorism? Terrorism is using rigidity to compel a man or woman to dedicate an act, or refrain from committing an act, that may not unlawful. Terrorism is unquestionably one of those intimidation. Have our legislators ever used this? What do you call the Elian Gonzalez kidnapping? What might you call thugs who stick a sub machinegun interior the face of latest child? Does that qualify as terrorism? enable me clarify the version between regulation inforcement and terrorism, lest somebody think of that the Gestapo, or the KGB could be seen "regulation enforcement" businesses. regulation enforcement makes use of in user-friendly terms the rigidity mandatory. Terrorism attempt to intimidate, the message is "positioned up or die". that's form of like drawing near somebody who owes you $5. you are able to ask the guy for the money he owes you, or you are able to pistol-whip him, and then threaten to shoot him, till he will pay you the money he owes you. that's all approximately appearing in a existence like way. In my early days, i substitute into in contact with Auxiliary Police. I took section in a raid. the supervisor knocked on the door, and provided the warrant. We walked in, and proceeded to serve the warrant. no one substitute into threatened with pistols or shotguns. no one substitute into roughed up. there substitute into no choose for. in the present day, with the militarization of regulation enforcement, and the proliferation of SWAT communities, that's much less complicated to kick in a door-orcontinual a tank by using it. WACO is a prefect occasion. The warrant might have been served interior the suitable way, and no one might have died. Cowards are unwilling to try this. they want to make use of the optimal volume of rigidity, and assume that their objective will meakly positioned up. often times, this blows up their face, as interior the WACO fiasco.
2016-10-10 08:43:34
·
answer #7
·
answered by brence 4
·
0⤊
0⤋
Every criminal has a motive, try to find out what motivates the people behind the terrorists acts. If we don't try to learn something were just chasing our tails.
I don't want my grand-kids caught up in a generational dispute. That's just what they're going to inherit if we don't get smart in a hurry.
2007-09-10 16:39:28
·
answer #8
·
answered by unbridled optimism 2
·
2⤊
0⤋
Yes. Just turn the middle east into a glass parking lot. Nuke all Muslims! While it is true that not all Muslims are terrorists, it is a fact that most terrorists are Muslims. It is also a fact that most Muslims either openly support the jihadist terrorists or they sympathize with them. Get a clue, liberals!
2007-09-10 16:29:51
·
answer #9
·
answered by Anonymous
·
2⤊
2⤋
Not completely. It is prevented by diligently monitoring the internet, eavesdropping on phone conversation, use of hidden cameras, and lots of paid informants.. It can't be prevented completely. Somebody occasionally slips through the cracks.
2007-09-10 16:33:26
·
answer #10
·
answered by spirit dummy 5
·
0⤊
2⤋