Just like GLOBAL WARMING, there is NO DEBATE that these people are a threat to us. They admit that they want to kill all of us, even those of us who sympathize with them. It seems like many of you want to stop the war, stop any interrogation methods that aren't totally friendly (how can you compare waterboarding to beheading?). We should just pull out of everywhere, blah, blah... Okay, so how exactly do we defend ourselves against people who are trying to put NUKES together to destroy us, all of us, including you?
2007-11-09 05:58:09 · 10 answers · asked by Anonymous in Politics & Government ➔ Politics
special ops. seek and destroy.
attacking Iraq was and is NOT the way to fight terrorism.
2007-11-09 06:02:24 · answer #1 · answered by truth seeker 7 · 1⤊ 3⤋
What does waterboarding have to do with beheading? Why do neocons keep comparing the two when one is a torturous method of interrogation and the other is an execution. You do know, don't you, that if you behead someone you won't be getting any information out of them, correct?
And since your methods of dealing with terrorists (going to war with the wrong country, not capturing or caring about the terrorists who did bomb us, Abu Ghrab, Quitmo) have only created more terrorists and hate towards the U.S. and there are more terrorist attacks world wide than ever, what makes you think anything being done now is effective?
2007-11-09 14:08:08 · answer #2 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 1⤋
The actual rank-and-file tend to take care of themselves. Suicide bombing doesn't leave anyone to 'handle,' at least, not unless you have tweazers and a magnifying glass. While defending against terrorism is probably a little better than not doing so, defense can never stop terrorism, just stop or reduce the damage of /some/ terrorist attacks.
The only way to address terrorism is to address the cause the terrorists are killing for. You can capitulate and hope they don't ask for even more once you've given them everything they want. You can negotiate, and try not to give into them anymore than you have to. You can refuse to negotiate and hope they go away. Or, you can deter the use of terrorism by retaliating in response to terrorist acts, not against the terrorists, specifically, but by acting to harm the cause they hold dear. Deterence, though, requires not tit-for-tat retaliation, but overwhelming retaliation, and few have the stomach for that.
2007-11-09 14:09:50 · answer #3 · answered by B.Kevorkian 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Are you talking about terrorists or suspects?
If you are talking about suspects, they should be treated like any other criminal suspect until evidence clearly shows without a doubt that they are terrorists or would be, if their plans were not thwarted.
If there is no doubt they ARE terrorists, they should have their arms and legs tied and thrown into a hog pin, while a camera crew films the event and posts it on the internet, to discourage others that would wish to follow in their footsteps.
If you are asking how they should be captured, covert operation coupled with good intel is the only way to fight terrorists effectively.
2007-11-09 14:03:22 · answer #4 · answered by avail_skillz 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
I dont think they can be fought, they want attention, sadly the only way to stop someone that wants attention wants to scare is to ignore them and not let them effect you.
Could mean people get hurt, but the more attentioned shined on them the more they will work at there bad ways.
If people just treated each other with respect and forgave, we wouldn't have this problem.
And unfortunately everyone is to blame in this regard, the good and the bad.
2007-11-09 14:19:25 · answer #5 · answered by Kellyn25 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
A bullet in the head.
After WW2 there were Nazis who carried out terrorist attacks against the occupying allied forces. They wore no uniforms and engaged in guerrilla type warfare. When any of them were captured they were executed ON THE SPOT !
No trial, no nothing.
2007-11-09 14:08:26 · answer #6 · answered by john c 6 · 2⤊ 0⤋
How should we handle them?.....we handle by taking the high road and respecting the human rights of those accused..... We cannot preach to the world that we are the guiding light to freedom and human rights, then totally ignore the human rights of anyone we want....... Beheading people is reprehensible, I prefer we show the world that we are indeed better than those we are fighting......... Being a hypocryte is the surest way of ensuring that no one will listen to our message
2007-11-09 14:04:05 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 2⤋
First you have to determine who is the terrorist.
2007-11-09 14:02:15 · answer #8 · answered by Rja 5 · 1⤊ 1⤋
send me in as a merc.
2007-11-09 14:03:19 · answer #9 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 1⤋
Sadly, the sheep will never get it.
2007-11-09 14:01:58 · answer #10 · answered by Smoking Man 3 · 2⤊ 3⤋