Would electing a female president create more terrorists?

Question

Since our most dangerous foreign terrorists stone women for nothing and treat the female sex like garbage.... And don't want women to have rights in their own countries, would there be more of those who are missguided as of yet, but (so far) not violent toward the West -flocking to join to fight a jihad against a president they consider so little of?

By the way - I'm not being a sexist....Just wondering if it would create more tension and make us less safe?

Answer 1

seeing the way they treat women and knowing the wayt that they think of them i would definately say that it would probably cause an outrage and lead to more terrorists

Answer 2

Margaret Thatcher faced the toughest challenges for about a decade from Irish Revolutionaries. She remained very tough with them and even not conceded to world pressure when some of the revolutionaries have gone on fasting till death and even some of them succumbed.

Probably there is no need of mentioning in what situations Golda Meier remained Prime Minister in Israel.

America, unlike Britain and Israel ,which remain amidst all the turmoil, is relatively more safely situated among two mighty oceans. Except the 9/11 major terrorist activity, terrorism is not a routine event and the resources and the security systems in America are far far greater.

So, a man or a woman president should not make much difference. Americans are unnecessarily sceptical about women leading their society.

One fact has to be admitted that women are not treated at par with men, at lest in the political arena. Other wise by now there must have been several women presidents by now and all these apprehensions would never have been there.

Answer 3

It would have little or no impact on terrorism. What creates terrorism is a combination of several factors.

First, and foremost, is a sense that the West is trying to control Muslim countries and keep them down. In other words, they believe that our actions in Muslim countries are designed to support oppression. Since many of our so-called allies in the Muslim world are actually oppressive governments and since they tend to blame us for their own actions, it is easy to see how your average citizen gets this impression.

Second, you need an ideology that justifies taking up arms against the "infidel" who is responsible for your oppression, preferably one with divine sanction that is part of the culture. Amazingly, our allies in the royal family of Saudi Arabia have just such an ideology and willingly export it around the world.

Third, you need a group of dissatisfied youth. Amazingly, this is a grouping that will always exist. The amount and degree of dissatisfied Muslim youths depends on local economies and how well Muslims assimilate in various non-Muslim countries.

You take these three and combine them together and, voila, you have a group of terrorists. I do not see how having a woman as President would have any impact on these three factors. We are the infidel oppressing Islam in the eyes of these people regardless of who is President. This perception is not something that will be changed overnight and will take a permanent change in policy. The one good thing that President Bush did in his war on Terrorism was to insist that our so-called allies take steps toward becoming freer and more democratic. However, when Islamic fundamentalists began winning elections (which should have shocked no one as they were the only organized opposition to corrupt secular governments that run our allies), President Bush backed down undercutting the very message that we need to be sending if we are ever to reduce terrorism.

Answer 4

I don't think so. Take a look at the example of Benazir Bhutto, a Pakistani politician who became the first woman to lead a post-colonial Muslim state.

Bhutto is the twice-elected Prime Minister of Pakistan, being sworn-in for the first time in 1988, to be deposed 20 months later, under controversial orders of the then president Ghulam Ishaq Khan, on grounds of alleged corruption. Benazir was re-elected to power in 1993 but subsequently sacked by the President in 1996 on similar charges.

Although Bhutto has been living in exile since 1999, she is scheduled to return to Pakistan on October 18, 2007, and she was voted one of the 100 most powerful women in politics in 2007 by Forbes Magazine.

Answer 5

Allah or God would still be made use of no matter who was in office to justify acts by whichever small percentage were to seek power that way. What a President could do is denounce that small percentage as propagandists using Allah or God for their own advantage. The President then could then suggest that this be termed propaganda and not religion by law for those of that small percentage. The President might go further in suggesting that God be labeled propaganda as well as Allah as so much ill has been done under the guise of either. Suggest that as in 19th Century U.S. God was a tool in the hands of The Church in supressing the culture of the indiginous population and The Church now has retained the same structure that this indicates a refusal on the part of everyone to deal with that event and that this should be legal grounds for dissolving The Church. It should also be elsewhere as anyone who says they believe in God or adheres to The Church is by extent condoning what The Church did as it is part of the same belief system that said at this time to supress the indiginous populations of 4 Continents as well . Further Allah was also made use of in slavery on one continent or at least the belief was mantained which was only a mask for same. So get rid of all of this as by any legal basis it should begone. will not go down well but there it is.

Answer 6

Should it matter? Should we all hide in our homes and let Homeland Security run the country?

I'm an American. I don't really care what a terrorist thinks. I'm disgusted by these weak, so-called 'patriots' that want to trade thier freedom for security.

Answer 7

I'd be more terrified of having a woman president,especially H.Clinton than of the actual terrorist.I already know what the terrorist are capable of but I have know earthly idea of what she would do.

Answer 8

It's worked for other countries like Britain and India. What are the Americans so afraid of?

Answer 9

I don't think it would create more, but they might think a woman might not be as aggressive to stop them as a man.

Answer 10

terrorists will attack regardless, we got attacked under bush didnt we?