What we're doing is not enough

I do not agree with how we’re handling this terrorist crisis. I fail to see what can be gained from a prolonged war with a people whom we are not even sure of their extent in the involvement of September 11. Not that I’d be against a prolonged war if that were the way to go, but I just see many more drawbacks than gains from one.


What we should’ve done is wait until we had enough proof to show the world who likely was responsible. Then we should’ve made swift and severe our actions. I’m not talking about threats of war, bombings or sanctions, but a complete obliteration of any groups or even groups abetting such groups who were responsible. This is the way to deal with terrorism. For each slap in the face they deliver, we pound them with a sledgehammer.


I don’t mean in any way to make light of our losses on September 11, by calling it a mere slap in the face. Of course, it was much more. One life lost to terrorism is 100% too many. But let’s face it. It was a primitive and crude act. It’s a sad but true fact, that in this day and age killing mass numbers of innocent civilians is not that difficult of a thing to do if someone is so inclined. If anything this ability will only increase with time as technology advances and falls into the wrong hands. This threat will continue forever and the only way to stop it is to show in “no uncertain terms” that it will never be worth attempting. This is the same concept that has so far prevented nuclear proliferation of our planet. The United States and Russia both understood well that nuclear warfare is simply not acceptable because there is nothing to be gained from it. It’s not until this very idea is driven home to the would-be terrorists, that terrorism can be prevented. Even if it means using nuclear warfare against terrorism. Our actions must be swift and severe. We are not doing that. If anything, we are giving credence to their actions. This is a huge mistake.

Everyone keeps using catch phrases like "swift and decisive". What do you think we should do? Anyone can use adjectives, we need a plan. Yes, I disagree with some aspects of the handling of this action (mostly dealing with the diplomatic end), but as far as the attacks on Afghanistan go, I see no better solution. We seem to be dismantling their defensive structure so that when we do go in on the ground, our casualties will be minimized. It is hard to find people living in caves and tents. It takes time. It is not the microwave or McDonalds. I would not necessarily be against using tactical nukes, but on what? We do have proof regarding who was responsible. We showed the world. This occured about a month ago. Just because the newscasters felt that an envelope stuffed with baking powder is a more sensational story, don't assume that things aren't happening.


I agree with your sentiments regarding other countries. The perpetrators of this act are not the only ones who hate us and will try to bring us down. If connections can be proven to any country with a real centralized government, they should be removed from power using all necessary force.


Everyone wants swift and severe action to punish those responsible. But actually finding a way to do that is a bit of a trick. I am tired of hearing people complain without offering a better solution. Not to single you or anyone here out, but the people on TV can't hear me if I talk back to them.


-G-

I suppose you're right. Swift and severe is not a plan. Still, it seems to be the opposite of what we're doing. Maybe drastic action would've been a better word to use.


Also, while there's little doubt that proof exists, I do not believe we have documented this evidence to anyone but the Brits. As far as the rest of the world is concerned it is heresay.


What should we do? Gather all evidence and wait. Wait until absolute proof is in hand. This will likely conclude Bin Laden's involvement along with connections to Saddam Hussien. Document it to the world and demand the Taliban and Iraq hand over Bin Laden and Saddam Hussien. Of course they won't and when they fail to do so, we make both countries into very large lakes. That should prevent the next terroristic act from occurring for a long while. I know this sounds overly simplistic, but I truly believe that something drastic must be done to stop terrorism. Our simple declaration of war and prolonged fighting will do nothing to prevent another terrorist attack in the future.

From what I have read the USA does indeed have proof and has shared it with at least the British...but I think more nations probably have been given sufficient evidence as well.


Isn't there widely known proof regarding bin Laden's deadly terrorist attacks a few years ago? Didn't he even admit it? That alone should be reason enough to eliminate him and his henchmen. Even before Sept 11, there was plenty of evidence and good reason for the free world to unite and hunt down terrorists...it's just a pity that it took something like the 9/11 tragedy to wake everyone up. These faster and more convincingly these deadly fanatical psycho leaders and henchmen are dealt with around the world, the better off everyone else will be...I hope.

I'm not sure what you thought I was kidding about. The proof? It's my understanding that we have NOT made much of our information (due to security reasons) public.


Isn't this pretty much the whole reason we are currently at war with the Taliban? They refused to turn over Bin Laden because we did not offer proof of his guilt.


As for our past failure to bring him to justice, that just serves my point. It's not so much the swift part but the severe part which I think is important. We did nothing the first time. However, I don't (and neither will the rest of the world) buy your premise that one crime proves another. Even though it's likely the same party.


I think the message we must drive home is clear. For every drop of American blood spilled, they will shed buckets. That's not happening...

I think we would have been at war with them anyway unless they turned over bin Laden and his lieutenants and destroyed the training camps. Besides, even if we made it all public I'll bet the Taliban would still have proved to be intransigent...they have deep ties to al Qaeda.


I wasn't so much trying to say that one act proves another, but at this point it doesn't need to be a matter of proof, and it shouldn't have to be. bin Laden's past deadly terrorist activities and present avowed stance to wage terroristic war against us should in itself be more than sufficient cause to merit his elimination.