AI: After Iraq?
 

So I've been wondering about terrorism and how the U.S. will fight it after pulling out of Iraq. I wouldn't be in college if I had a nickel for every time I heard "Iraq is distracting us from the REAL War on Terror". So what do we do after Iraq? And is the War over if we "defeat" Al Qaeda and capture bin Ladin? I'm particularly interested in the Dem/lib response...

Re: AI: After Iraq?
 

[ QUOTE ]
So I've been wondering about terrorism and how the U.S. will fight it after pulling out of Iraq. I wouldn't be in college if I had a nickel for every time I heard "Iraq is distracting us from the REAL War on Terror". So what do we do after Iraq? And is the War over if we "defeat" Al Qaeda and capture bin Ladin? I'm particularly interested in the Dem/lib response...

[/ QUOTE ]

Its hard to say, 2020 is a long way off.

Re: AI: After Iraq?
 

I think the problem with America's war on terror is that the people really think a war on terror can/ will be won. If anything I think the Iraqi war has done more to swell the ranks of Al Qaeda type terror groups than anything.

When we pull out of Iraq I think that there will be a lot of politicians telling us that we are safer and that we made the world a better place by killing hundreds of thousands of Iraqi people. This will be generally well accepted and the war will be forgotton, until the next big terror attack.

Despite popular belief terrorism is rarely solved by killing terrorists. There are very few major counter-terrorist (by terrorist I mean any intangible armed force) operations which have been successful. Cuba, Vietnam, France, hell almost the entire new world, all were taken overby "terrorist" forces.

Terrorism exists as a response to a stimuli. There are precious few things that would drive me to explode myself in order to kill a few foreigners. When the root of the terrorist's stimuli is found, and dealt with, the terrorist will no longer fight.

The most dangerous man is one who has nothing to lose, as long as terrorists feel they have nothing to lose then the "war on terror" will last forever.

Re: AI: After Iraq?
 

I'd prefer if people actually answer the question. What should be done about terrorism?

Re: AI: After Iraq?
 

you asked what happens after Iraq, the answer is nothing. A fanatical terrorist is not going to step back and ask himself why hes fighting a group of people who just "rebulit" dictatorship, he is going to ask why his family was killed in the war.

Iraq is a meaningless badge of our "war of Terror" which will give us no long term results.

Terrorism cannot be fought by killing terrorist wholesale, the root of the problem must be discovered and dealt with. The peopl of the thrid world have serious and legitimate greviences against the US and many other Western powers. A terrorist is not born because Saddam Hussain is in power, ratherhe is born because of the dire straights his area of the world is in (these dire straights also lead to men like Saddam hussain being in power).

Terrorism will be solved when there is no one willing to blow themselves up anymore. This will only happen when 1)all the candidates for terrorism are dead or 2) when these people find themselves not in the situation where exploding yourself is a sane option. When the first world begins to treat the third world with decency perhaps peace is obtainable.

Re: AI: After Iraq?
 

[ QUOTE ]
I'd prefer if people actually answer the question. What should be done about terrorism?

[/ QUOTE ]

I think that if we left the Middle East and never went back to rebuild another country, we'd be doing our country a huge favor. It's impossible to say exactly how much of a "terrorist threat" there'd be if we left them alone, but I'd be very surprised if things got any worse, or even didn't get better, than what they are now. I can't see how the "bring the fight to them" strategy can really be effective.

Our country has plenty of problems here. The real threat of terrorism isn't very large. I'm sure that, even for people in New York, DC, and the other major metropolitan areas, the danger from terrorism is far less than from other activities, and certainly much much less than the news and government (Democrats and Republicans alike) would like us to believe.

I think we have enough things to spend money on here, and plenty of things that need fixing. I'd rather us not rebuild countries on our own, or invade our "enemies" without very real consequences otherwise. And if that doesn't work, we can evaluate our options and try again.

I strongly believe that if we can stop meddling in every corner of the world, and get rid of this "you're with us or you're against us" attitude, etc., we'll be much safer and much better off.

Define your assumptions
 

We have to choose between two assumptions:

(a) the United States is truly interested in ending the war on terror and severely scaling the military down to primarily defending the country?

or

(b) the United States wants this low-intensity war to keep burning and American might to continue being projected all over the globe?

Re: AI: After Iraq?
 

[ QUOTE ]
I'd prefer if people actually answer the question. What should be done about terrorism?

[/ QUOTE ]

This is why theweatherman is right and you are part of the problem.

Re: AI: After Iraq?
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I'd prefer if people actually answer the question. What should be done about terrorism?

[/ QUOTE ]

This is why theweatherman is right and you are part of the problem.

[/ QUOTE ]

Brutal way to say it, but I agree.

Re: AI: After Iraq?
 

I think it was very unfortunate that Bush was president when 9/11 occurred. Another administration might never have uttered the phrase "War on Terror" and treated the event like the horrendous crime it was, by focusing on apprehending and bringing to justice the perpetrators.

That's the best outcome we can hope for if we have no intention of dealing with the underlying complaints of the people attacking us.

Re: AI: After Iraq?
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I'd prefer if people actually answer the question. What should be done about terrorism?

[/ QUOTE ]

This is why theweatherman is right and you are part of the problem.

[/ QUOTE ]

Brutal way to say it, but I agree.

[/ QUOTE ]

Yes the first thing I thought of when I read this thread is BCPVP is "part of the problem"

yeah BCPVP, the nerve of you to ask a question in which you wanted a discus possible opinions and or military strategies.

Re: AI: After Iraq?
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I'd prefer if people actually answer the question. What should be done about terrorism?

[/ QUOTE ]

This is why theweatherman is right and you are part of the problem.

[/ QUOTE ]

Brutal way to say it, but I agree.

[/ QUOTE ]

Yes the first thing I thought of when I read this thread is BCPVP is "part of the problem"

yeah BCPVP, the nerve of you to ask a question in which you wanted a discus possible opinions and or military strategies.

[/ QUOTE ]

Part of the problem, is that so much money and brain power is put into how to combat this militarily, when there is no military solution. Terrorism is a state of mind, it is a cultural, psychological battle; not a military one.

Re: AI: After Iraq?
 

Are you asking what we should do or what we are likely to do? These are really two different questions.

Re: AI: After Iraq?
 

[ QUOTE ]
Part of the problem, is that so much money and brain power is put into how to combat this militarily, when there is no military solution. Terrorism is a state of mind, it is a cultural, psychological battle; not a military one.

[/ QUOTE ]

so you agree with theweatherman that "nothing" should be done?

Re: AI: After Iraq?
 

[ QUOTE ]
Part of the problem, is that so much money and brain power is put into how to combat this militarily, when there is no military solution. Terrorism is a state of mind, it is a cultural, psychological battle; not a military one.

[/ QUOTE ]

Thank you. The US used to have something called 'soft power'. For instance, in Communist Russia, people used to spend two months salary for a pair of Levi's. Many Saudi and Iranian youths long for a western way of life, free from religous oppression.

But we decided to act like assholes and attack a country that never did anything to harm Americans. Now, we need to change our regime.

Terrorists arent born, they are bred. The current crop of terrorists was bred by the CIA in the 1980's to fight the Russians in Afganistan. The next crop is being bred in Iraq. What would you do if your Dad was anally raped in an American Prison.

We are holding 13,000 Iraqis in jail, only 2 percent of whom have been convicted of a crime. Way to win the hearts and minds.

We need to stop torturing and stop invading countries for no reason, the power of our superior culture will do the rest.

Re: AI: After Iraq?
 

[ QUOTE ]
yeah BCPVP, the nerve of you to ask a question in which you wanted a discus possible opinions and or military strategies.

[/ QUOTE ]

He doesn't want to discuss it. He wants his opinions and thoughts on the matter to be validated.

But OK, I'll bite. How about treating it as a crime and not a war?

Re: AI: After Iraq?
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Part of the problem, is that so much money and brain power is put into how to combat this militarily, when there is no military solution. Terrorism is a state of mind, it is a cultural, psychological battle; not a military one.

[/ QUOTE ]

so you agree with theweatherman that "nothing" should be done?

[/ QUOTE ]

Oh no, far from it. I am not a pacifist, I i.e. supported the invasion in Afghanistan; but I think the main effort should be non-military.

Re: AI: After Iraq?
 

[ QUOTE ]
What would you do if your Dad was anally raped in an American Prison.

[/ QUOTE ]

Obviously I would go kill a bunch of innocent strangers. Probably some of my fellow Iraqis. That's the only conceivable response.

Re: AI: After Iraq?
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
What would you do if your Dad was anally raped in an American Prison.

[/ QUOTE ]

Obviously I would go kill a bunch of innocent strangers. Probably some of my fellow Iraqis. That's the only conceivable response.

[/ QUOTE ]

Thats a strange response. You know, attacks on American military forces have increased from 200 per day after the invasion to 500 per day in october.

You are really buying into the faux news propaganda...try to be a free thinker for a change. If it doesnt make sense, its probobly not true.

Re: AI: After Iraq?
 

[ QUOTE ]
You are really buying into the faux news propaganda...try to be a free thinker for a change.

[/ QUOTE ]

I'm going to assume that by "free thinker" you mean assuming that everyone who disagrees with you is an idiot who drools over Bill O'Reilly and ignoring the rules of spelling, capitalization, and punctuation? No thanks.

[ QUOTE ]
You know, attacks on American military forces have increased from 200 per day after the invasion to 500 per day in october.

[/ QUOTE ]

I thought we were talking about terrorists. Don't you guys like to call people who attack our troops "insurgents" or "freedom fighters"? In any case, I'm more concerned about the people who are setting off bombs in Amman hotels, or blowing up car bombs in Baghdad. People attacking US soldiers is a temporary problem that will end when US soldiers leave. I don't think the former category can be reasonably attributed to prison rape alone.

Re: AI: After Iraq?
 

Not just prison rape, but also the disgrace of having foreign troops on your land. Its hard to imagine an army of Nigerians or Chinese in America, subjegating us.


"I thought we were talking about terrorists. Don't you guys like to call people who attack our troops "insurgents" or "freedom fighters"?"

Dont put words in my mouth if you want to be taken seriously.

Re: AI: After Iraq?
 

[ QUOTE ]
He doesn't want to discuss it. He wants his opinions and thoughts on the matter to be validated.

[/ QUOTE ]
Quite untrue. Why would I ask for the left-wing's perspective if I wanted my own opinions and thoughts validated? I don't need to get my self esteem from some strangers on the internet.

[ QUOTE ]
But OK, I'll bite. How about treating it as a crime and not a war?

[/ QUOTE ]
Ok, continue...

Re: AI: After Iraq?
 

We shouldn't do anything. Terrorist attacks happen. We could save more lifes by taking the money we spend on security and feeding the homeless.

Re: AI: After Iraq?
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
But OK, I'll bite. How about treating it as a crime and not a war?

[/ QUOTE ]


Ok, continue...

[/ QUOTE ]

I have nothing to add. I'm not the one deluding myself.

Re: AI: After Iraq?
 

i have a question. are we really fighting terror or are we attempting to democratize iraq through force? most americans were conditioned to believe that iraq was a better target in the wake of 9/11. so we were indeed fighting a war on terror. but now, our troops are operating to free iraq. i'm confused.

my thoughts my not have anything to do with the previous posts, but i was just wondering...

You saw the answer and chose to ignore it.
 

Here is the quote from "theweatherman"

[ QUOTE ]
Terrorism exists as a response to a stimuli. There are precious few things that would drive me to explode myself in order to kill a few foreigners. When the root of the terrorist's stimuli is found, and dealt with, the terrorist will no longer fight.

The most dangerous man is one who has nothing to lose, as long as terrorists feel they have nothing to lose then the "war on terror" will last forever.


[/ QUOTE ]

The answer is there.

Re: You saw the answer and chose to ignore it.
 

Ok, this is getting closer to what I intended. So what is the terrorists' stimuli and what can be feasibly done about it?

Re: You saw the answer and chose to ignore it.
 

Unfortunatly most of the issues terrorists have are based in religious orign (IE their hatred of israel) While it seems like this is an impossible point of contention, since the terrorists want israel destroyed, there are ways around it.

Iran in the 1950's was in the midst of a secular uprising, a revolution on par with the secular movements in the western world that brought an end to monarchies and a rise to democracy. America swifty helped to crush this rebellion an reinstalled the shah. The shah then killed everyone who opposed him (the secular middle class. Finally he was over thrown by a fanatical sect of islam.

We could start combating terrorism by rebuliding themiddle east, not governmentally but economically. Almost every successful revolution in history has come from the middle class. Our middle eastern policies for the past few decades have been sacntions and isloation, both destroy the middle class and allow th eupper class to prosper while the people starve.

Rebulid the middle class, let them chose their own path and terrorism will fizzle out.