"Are you better off now than you were four years ago?" is a cliche in American politics. It refers to economic well-being, but what if it refers to security?
-Is the U.S. safer?
-Are Americans safer?
-What are the threats to safety?
-What are some solutions?
What do you think? And why?
Mark,
Thanks! As you indirectly point out I was narrowly focusing on just the war objecitives and execution (which was the discussion point). NOT the aftermath and discussion of what it will take now. On that as you point out the facts support the conclusion that though a small war with limited objectives those objectives were accomplished and by definition the war was one.. Thanks!
One can argue about whether the objecives were sufficient, worth fighting for,a sure thing, the post war manage correctly by Pres's Bush, Clintin, Bush but the war as a definable event was won.
vry,
RET
Retired but Active
Mark and SAT: Excellent post Mark. I think, however, that you might have misread my earlier posts. I DO NOT advocate turning the Middle East into a "sheet of glass". We can, and should, win the war in Iraq and elsewhere in the Middle East (if necessary) without the use of Nuclear Weapons. We do have the ability to selectively render the entire country incapable of sustaining itself OR an insurgency using conventional weapons alone. My major problem with what we are doing over there right now is the FACT that we continually go out of our way to avoid civilian casualties. So far out of our way that the insurgents use this "strategy" to their definite advantage. They set up shop in Mosques, private homes, private businesses, schools, hospitals, and anywhere else that they believe we will do everything to avoid causing civilian casulties and a controversy in World Opinion AND in the United States. This is a total mistake. Of course I do not advocate the wholesale slaughter of innocent civilians but I certainly do not advocate continuing the tactics and strategy that have served us so poorly over the past 3 years. We are actually WORSE off now than when we invaded.
SAT; Yes, we started this war with a set of "limited" objectives. But even these objectives have NOT been met. The ONLY thing that we have done is to take Saddam out of power. But, we have done NOTHING to curb the unbridled growth of the insurgency in Iraq. And, because of this "do nothing" strategy(?) we have actually ENCOURAGED those in other countrys in the region to adopt the Iraqi Insurgent Strategies. Thus, we are far worse off now than before we went in.
Furthermore, our efforts in Afghanistan amounted to little more than headlines for the news outlets in this and other countries. So, we ousted the Taliban. Well, guess what? That did not last long since they are back in full swing now. And, we helped install a "democratically elected" CENTRAL(?) government! Bull! This so-called government has NEVER controlled more than about 10% of Afghanistan. War lords and drug czars control the rest. Just a quick support for this contention. In an AP article by Fisnik Abrashi TODAY it is made very clear that Opium cultivation in Afghanistan is up (this year) by more than 40 percent from 2024. But, the United States, along with a few other countries, have spent HUNDREDS OF MILLIONS of dollars to combat the drugs trade in that country. To NO AVAIL.
So, whether we are talking about trying to eradicate a drug industry that accounts for over 50% of Afghanistan's total GDP and supplies nearly 70% of the worlds Opium and thus Heroin (much of that in the US that costs us countless MORE millions) OR talking about some sort of Military victory, we are FAILING.
A significant part of the reasons for these failures is a failure to develop a STRATEGY for winning. We can say our strategy is anything we want to say it is and, thus, ensure that we have had "Strategic" success. But this really does not amount to beans. All we really accomplished in the first Gulf War was to generate a lot of headlines. We did NOTHING to address (much less solve) the MAJOR problems of stopping what we knew was happening in the region. We were losing power and influence in that region even BEFORE we invaded Iraq and we did nothing to change that when we had half a chance. WE ARE LOSING this war just like we LOST in Viet Nam, Korea, and other places. THIS is the problem.
And, for this, we can primarily thank "Team BUSH". Of course, Clinton did nothing to change the course we were on so don't think I am simply a Bush Basher. I a simply pixsed at the way things have been going and the conviction that NOTHING is being done to change the course.
If your “Are we safer?” question is in the spirit of the Democratic boilerplate used to hammer Bush, then take it somewhere else.
If you question is serious, then here are my answers.
-Is the U.S. safer?
Yes. The war in Iraq has had two major effects on international terrorism (at least as practiced by al Qaeda).
The first (which increases our danger) is to radicalize increasing numbers of young Muslim men who are angry at our activities in the Middle East.
However, the second (which vastly decreases the threat here at home) is the change in focus of the terrorists. The 9/11 attack was designed to “kill the Americans and their allies, including civilians and military, … in any country in which it is possible to do it.” as prescribed in Osama bin Laden’s fatwa of February 22, 1998.
Following 9/11, we leaned on Saudi Arabia to crack down on al Qaeda and we invaded Iraq. Subsequent to these actions, in 2024 bin Laden called for jihad in Iraq to expel the invaders and for the people to rise up against the government in Riyadh.
There is some truth to the assertion that we are fighting them there so we don’t have to fight them here. It would be nice if we had an administration that could figure out how to win this fight.
-Are Americans safer?
Here, at home, yes. Anywhere outside of North Africa and South Asia, probably yes. Inside the Islamic world, definitely not.
-Is the world safer?
No, but here again there are two major trends, neither of which are under our complete control.
The first is that we (including the British and the Pakistanis and many others) have fairly thoroughly shredded al Qaeda’s middle management. The can no longer fund, supply or directly control their scattered cells. This decreases our risk.
Unfortunately, the second is that terrorism by its very nature can be self organizing. Small cells can act independently taking their broad direction of tapes and videos as they are released.
-What are the threats to safety?
We have three problems.
1. The 20th century has not been kind to the Muslim world. They’ve been exploited by imperialists, pushed around by the developed countries and treated as second class citizens. The Islamic terrorist movement dates back to the dissolution of the Ottoman Empire by the British and French following WW-I.
2. We are fighting an idea – the idea that if only Muslims will embrace the faith and rise up in jihad, they can make their enemies tremble at their feet and reestablish the glory days of the Empire circa 1200 AD. This is a very attractive idea to poor and powerless people with no prospects for a better life and a long history of resentments.
3. Unfortunately, for all its many faults, the “evil empire” kept the lid on much of this instability. With the collapse of the Soviet Union, long simmering resentments bubbled to the surface. More accurately, these resentments, as contested in Afghanistan, pretty much hammered the last nail into the Soviet coffin.
The bottom line is that there’s a new game in town and while the chances of the Muslim world ever coalescing into a new Islamic empire are nil (the resentments between the Sunni’s and the Shi-ites, not to mention the other two dozen factions), the dream is compelling and more than sufficient to inspire a great deal of violence.
-What are some solutions?
Winning in Iraq and creating a viable and prosperous democracy that could work the domino theory in our favor in the Middle East would be a great start.
The only real long term solution is to drain the swamp. This means enlisting the international community to fulfill the spirit of George W. Bush’s Second Inaugural Address. If it helps, read it in the voice of John F. Kennedy or Bill Clinton or any other statesman you respect.
This process is outlined in considerable detail in the brilliant book, “The Pentagon’s New Map” by Thomas Barnett.
--Vern
"Great minds discuss ideas, average minds discuss events, small minds discuss people."
- Vice Adm. H.G. Rickover
Nonsense and utter rubbish...no one elected a "spirt" committee to weed out anything what one commentator thinks is "politically incorrect"...so VernieMc isn't even nominated!
We have no mission to apologize to/for GWB nor to deny that his administration has convinced and unified a global well financed force to sees us as their mortal enemy. A force with no center (like a nation) that can ever surrender, "win", "loss", or even negotiate a general settlement.
So, americans will never again be as safe as we were before we invaded Iraq. Before Iraq we had a handful of small separate groups that are now becoming one.
Bill"for what we are together"
Bill, I will start with your effort toward censorship and Bill's response. For better or worse, we don't do censorship here. This requires that we plow through some senseless soliloquies and musings of folks with whom we disagree to varying degrees. But then that's what Unity 08 is about isn't it? To get past those areas where agreement might not be reached and find those where it can - on issues of critical importance to the long-term future of this nation.
Which brings me to my second observation - I pretty much agree wholeheartedly with the middle section of your post where you astutely outline the problem vis-a-vis the Islamic world and the west. And I would agree, using the typical American quarter-to-quarter analytical mode that yes, in the short term, America is safer. But I must continue to concur with Bill, that in the long term, falling back to Rumsfeld's query, we are in fact creating more terrorists than we're killing, that as you readily observe terrorism is much like cancer in its ability to mutate and metastisize, and that in our behavior in Iraq and indeed across the global stage through the last six years the Bush administration has created the perfect laboratory in which to grow and from which to disemminate this plague.
In picking the wrong fight and wrong strategy Bush has illuminated the many vulnerabilities of America and its military that will be exploited for decades to come. Israel has now managed to accomplish the same thing in Lebanon. This will be a long slog - one of choice rather than neccessity, and I am very doubtful that we'll see the situation much improved in the three or four short decades I have left on this sphere.
Mark Greene
Texas Democrat in the Middle
I have to repeat this statement as it provides clear and united policy... I think....
---
In many ways we are far safer than before... but in the same respect all phases of security must be upgraded... including a positive identification system or improved social security card to capture those already here... a card used at points of national security for access... then remove the luggage from below our seats on airliners, putting the luggage on older aircraft so if a bomb explodes it kills only 1 or 2 people... and those shipping ports must be moved off shore... easy enough? Let's roll... Earn Snyder
And a return to proper foreign policy in regard to national security... it's called the Airforce with no boots on any ground except our own ground! Providing logistics and air support to the natives of any nation fighting for freedom... if they have no soldiers to fight the fight on the ground with our help from the air then there is nobody on the ground to fight for? - Earn Snyder
Author "$aving the bureaucracy - Killing the beast"
Modern Progressive Independent
www.appyp.com/fix_main.html
I will never defend Rumsfeld"s botched war plans; however to be evenhanded he correctly predicted in a nationally televised address shortly after 9/11 that the war against Islamic terrorism would last at least 40-50 years.He said we will have to hang tough. He explained that hatred taught in Islamic schools against the West, Israel and USA in particular, has already created tens of millions of potential terrorists. The aborted train bombing in Germany on July 30,shows that Iraq is inconsequential to the Islamists, since Germany made a point of being against the Allied intervention.
You can not negotiate with these people, we can only try to reeducate the next 2 generations. Since France has already reneged in Lebanon and nobody else will disarm Hezballuh another war in the region is a certainty.
This is a more dangerous time than the Cold War because the enemy welcomes death. Russia and China wanted world domination but were rational adversaries.
With the spectre of Iran looming next to Al Queda I am afraid the whole world is less safe than before 9/11 and will get worse.
Retired but Active
"I have to repeat this statement as it provides clear and united policy... I think"
Vern, I am really not trying to pick on you but you keep posting things that are pretty much nonsensical and, contrary to your statement above, NOT clear and united. I would suggest that you, as a minimum, read your comments before posting them to help ensure their clarity. I really have no idea what you mean by "clear and united policy". It reads as though you actually believe that your posts are clear and that they automatically provide a "united policy". I don't think so.
When you're not busy labeling me it turns out that again we are in complete agreement:
"This is a more dangerous time than the Cold War because the enemy welcomes death. Russia and China wanted world domination but were rational adversaries.
With the spectre of Iran looming next to Al Queda I am afraid the whole world is less safe than before 9/11 and will get worse."
You left out our failure in Iraq and Afghanistan, but the gist is clear and undeniable. Perhaps we would do well next time (should we survive til next time) to take into account the nature of our proposed enemy before poking wrecklessly into its nest?
Mark Greene
Texas Democrat in the Middle
The only difference from when I served in the cold war and now is now is the genie is out of the bottle and Putin knows it, so he figures to make as much money from it as well as the chinese ... and we cannot put the genie back in the bottle... so we must secure the homeland and increase the level of security to protect ourselves... anything more or less will destroy us... It's as simple as using older airliners for luggage and new planes for the passengers, simply transporting the passengers luggage in another plane! And for cargo... just check it before it gets within 100 miles of my ports! - Earn Snyder
Author "$aving the bureaucracy - Killing the beast"
Modern Progressive Independent
www.appyp.com/fix_main.html
Before 911 our leadership new places and people would always exist in the world where people hated us, places these people would be popular and could hide... after 911 we changed that policy in error... and today we can't understand this mistake? For we cannot kill the genie, he's out of the bottle and we need to implement gps and positive identification systems immediately as I fear the enemy is planting himself within and must be flushed out in this way.... - Earn Snyder
Author "$aving the bureaucracy - Killing the beast"
Modern Progressive Independent
www.appyp.com/fix_main.html
The father says the world must suffer more before these gifts I speak of are realized... that Israel will leave the middle east on their own or be destroyed, along with those that sponsor her destruction ... and that this is the will of God and not man... And the people have been told these things at this proper time, we must not fret... and let nature take its course... as the world is a tree and even the strongest of limbs will fall off or be cut off if not pruned... as mine are standing here with our tools, standing ready after such things pass ... - Earn Snyder
Author "$aving the bureaucracy - Killing the beast"
Modern Progressive Independent
www.appyp.com/fix_main.html
No doubt in my mind man will ignore these things and select the toxic enviornment after such a war over dirt in Israel rather than working together to preserve life as we know it ... So mine are working quickly, spending much time to come up with ways for this nation to exist after such weapons have been unleased and our enviornment becomes toxic... have a nice day... - Earn Snyder
Just a reminder that this forum topic deals with national security. More specifically if you think the U.S. is safer now than it was four years ago. Also, back-to-back comment postings by the same author should be used sparingly if at all.
For it is the preservation of the holyland that matters and not who rules it... so we either call in the Airforce and take out the leadership of Syria now or save the holyland and move Israel to America... or the beautiful people and holyland may both be doomed with the radicalism now buring across the middle east... Earn Snyder
Author "$aving the bureaucracy - Killing the beast"
Modern Progressive Independent
www.appyp.com/fix_main.html
Retired but Active
I agree that Back to Back posting on this or any other forum is nonsense. The only result of such posting is to encourage everyone else to simply ignore ALL of these posts. They are a waste of time.
Yes, unless a relevant followup is really needed to complete your post back to back to back to back posting is a negative. (Though it does keep some action on an almost dead blog).
Anyhow, restrain yourselves or face Captain's Mast!
vry,
RET
I am in whole-hearted agreement on the curtailment (forceful if neccessary) of back to back postings. One or two posters have so deluged the site with rambling unintelligible soliloquies that I have no doubt visitors and potential participants are being frightened away...
Mark Greene
Texas Democrat in the Middle
Retired but Active
Mark: You are so right. I am so sick and tired of seeing the utter nonsense that Earn posts that I am just about to call it quits and go quietly away. It is a shame when one person can so mess up a forum that SHOULD be important. But, I have a sneaky suspicion that Earn hs had trouble communicating and socializing most of his life. Maybe he can take a hint and save his posts for something that is really worthwhile. But, I doubt it very seriously.
Don't disappear Darryel, you are one of the shining lights here. As my mother used to say, "Just ignore him and he'll go away." If not, at least maybe he'll take a hint, find another venue for his ramblings and only weigh in when he has something new or insightful to lend to the discussion. He's not a bad guy, just lonely...
Mark Greene
Texas Democrat in the Middle
I have reviewed my post and I never used the phrase "clear and united policy" (or at least my browser couldn't find it).
Also, I never suggested external censorship in my post. I did, and I do, suggest self restraint.
Pretty much all of the debate about Iraq in this country is based in the past. Did Bush lie? Where are the weapons of mass destruction? By invading we will create even more terrorists. etc.
The problem is that all this shoulda, woulda, coulda is water under the bridge. We are there now. What do we do going forward?
Also, we tend to think that if they hate us, it must be for something we did. This is simply not (completely) true. While our actions matter, there are thousands of madressas around the Islamic world that teach that the Jews are swine and the Christians are apes (or is it the other way around?).
In any event, hundreds of thousands of children have been taught that non-Muslims are less than human and deserve to be slaughtered. These teachings began before WW-II, before the US even emerged as a global power. The roots of modern Islamic terror go back to the post WW-I dismembering of the Ottoman empire by the British and France.
Furthermore, all of the repressive governments in the Middle East have and will continue to spin our every action in the worst possible light. There is nothing we can do to get on their good side because we are too valuable as an external enemy and distraction from their own failed domestic policies. When the Kuwaities and later the Iraqis were dancing in the streets, Syrian TV broadcast poetry 24/7.
I am honest enough to recognize both the things that Bush has done brilliantly and the things he has royally screwed up. For example:
Taking down the Taliban - brilliant.
Letting bin Laden escape - screwed up.
Taking down Saddam and trying to create a real alternative in Iraq - brilliant.
Trying to do it alone and with far too few troops - screwed up.
Chopping up al Qaeda's middle management - brilliant.
Bypassing the FISA court - screwed up.
But I digress into the past even as I rant against it.
What we need is a plan of action and a set of principles that will carry up forward for decades.
Refighting partisan battles here serves no one.
--Vern
"Great minds discuss ideas, average minds discuss events, small minds discuss people."
- Vice Adm. H.G. Rickover
Bill713 suggests that "So, americans[sic] will never again be as safe as we were before we invaded Iraq. Before Iraq we had a handful of small separate groups that are now becoming one."
Earn Snyder suggests that the way to win is by bombing them into submission from US based bombers.
Sorry, Gentlemen, you are both wrong.
Bill, before Iraq, we had al Qaeda - fully mobilized and capable to running a half million dollar operation (the 9/11 plot) on our soil, undetected for 2-3 years. Now we have their middle management decimated and their leaders hiding. Individual cells are still plenty dangerous on their own, but they are not (for the time being) a unified force. It remains to be seen if we will allow these fragments to regain the operational effectiveness they once enjoyed.
Furthermore, in Iraq there were (as of a few months ago) seventy something insurgent groups in operation - not one - more than seventy. Many of these groups hate each other outright while some (such as al Qaeda and the Bathists) have set aside their mutual hatred for the moment to oppose us. Most of the violence in Iraq (by a larger margin) is Iraqi on Iraqi killing AKA sectarian violence.
Earn, you cannot win this kind of war from the air. All you can do is kill people. Most of our Air Force lacks the global reach necessary to fly to Iraq and back from US territory. We need to operate from air bases close to the action in order to maintain an effective operational tempo. Our entire modern military is set up around the OODA Loop (a strategy developed by Air Force Colonel John Richard Boyd) which says that if you can operate inside your opponent's decision cycle (i.e. change the game faster than your opponent can react) you can win. Leisurely sorties from thousands of miles away won't cut it.
Furthermore, as we are relearning in Iraq and Afghanistan, you cannot control ground from the air. NATO’s victory over Serbia by air was a fluke. In reality, the Serbian people were willing let their government pursue ethnic cleaning until we bombed their power stations. Then, the Serbians (on the ground!) toppled their own government and handed over some (not all) of the worst offenders for war crimes trials. Even then, we had to put troops on the ground (they’re still there) to uncover further atrocities and seek out their perpetrators.
Americans hate death in war – our own deaths, death and suffering of innocent civilians, and even the death or mistreatment of our enemies. This is to the good credit of our nation and its people.
But we need to realize that not everyone feels the way we do. Hezbollah has recently shown their willingness to sacrifice any number of their neighbors -- the innocent and less then innocent civilians they hide behind -- in order to advance their cause.
There is evil in the world. We can choose to oppose it, or let it stand.
Through several elections, more than 75% of the eligible Iraqi voters have come forward, under threat of death, and cast their votes holding blue thumbs above their heads in defiant pride.
There is good in the world. We can choose to support it, or abandon it to fate.
The government that the Iraqis have chosen is deeply flawed. By day, many of its members scream insults at each other. By night, some of its members build sectarian militias terrorize their opponents and consolidate their own personal power. It will not be easy to plant the tree of liberty in such rocky soil but the Iraqi people are not lacking a democracy gene - they just lack experience and they need time to make and correct mistakes.
Americans like our wars to be both bloodless and short. This one (not Iraq but the whole struggle against Islamic militancy) will be as long and sometimes as bloody as the Cold War.
We say to ourselves that the Iraqis don’t cooperate with us because they see us as evil occupiers of their land or because we shame them with our arrogant military competence (e.g. defeating their country in just days). There is some truth to that, but I believe the real reason is much simpler. The new government has not been able to assert its sovereign power and the people do not know who will prevail. They can't trust us to stay and they know that if we pull out, the civil war will escalate (although we will be safe from having to watch it on our TV screens). They live in a part of the world where being on the wrong side can easily get a man and his whole family killed. It is safer to see no evil, hear no evil, speak no evil.
As a nation, we have a decision to make. We can choose to win or lose this war. What we are doing now is choosing to lose this war – slowly. Either way, there will be a heavy price to be paid.
--Vern
"Great minds discuss ideas, average minds discuss events, small minds discuss people."
- Vice Adm. H.G. Rickover
I must say my policy to return to that of Ron, George Sr., and Clinton would not be a mistake... Precision bombing to kill war criminals and providing air support and logistics should be the extent of our military in any situation... and my resolution also requires the implementation of modern positive identification systems and the wall that seperate the 3 tribes... until re-educated and in 20 years they can bring the walls down - Earn Snyder
Author "$aving the bureaucracy - Killing the beast"
Modern Progressive Independent
www.appyp.com/fix_main.html
Vern for what it's worth, I think your assesment of the War on Terrorisim is about the best I've seen here, and I've seen some good points from both sides of the fence.
Why don't you do a proof of concept? On yourself? Precision bomb your kitchen while you are in it. Blow yourself to smithereens and then let's see if you will continue to be a bother to us all?
That way we can easily see if you have been right all along.
"Autism is not a fad" - Martiniano
You got a good name and a good brain. I do appreciate your ability and willingness to tolerate differing views in the interest of cohesion.
Just thought I would take a moment away from bating Earn to tell you that
I like what you write.
-Is the U.S. safer?
Hmm, depends what you mean by that, but I will stick to obvious interp of that refering to terrorism.
From another airplane scenario? Yes, I think that point is fairly demonstrable by just going to fly somewhere now, and having to go through all the additonal security / restrictions. ;-)
But, we still have along way to go internally in other areas such cargo containers, borders and so on. In those areas not much seems to have changed, so I say the about the same there.
In terms of future threats? Demonstrably no, we are far, far less safe. The statistical trend line over the last few years is toward rapid growth in terrorism world wide to the tune of a few hundred percent increase. And, even eliminating Iraq from those stats, still leaves a large growth rate.
Further, apparently a growing number of these terrorists are being radicalized from ordinary citizens because of the precieved injustice of 'our' actions. Not a good trend.
The good news is that we should be more insulated from this than most countries because we have fewer muslims, decent education and a reasonable economy. But, I still bet we are 'on the clock' here as well. At least until we change our behavior and get smart about dealing with this issue.
-Are Americans safer?
Somewhat more so at home. But far, far less abroad. As a Prof at a State U, I get to talk to all sorts of foreign students and more than a few (ex) servicemen as well.
In some countries a growing portion of people are unhappy with the US and this is now somewhat bleeding over onto Americans in general. Probably a bad idea to go around with an 'I luv W' shirt on. If only to avoid hassle. In other countries it is a bit more ugly than that.
Maybe a good idea there to claim to be Canadian or Irish or something instead. This is a huge change from even a few years ago by the way. And I think it underscores that we are indeed moving in the wrong direction, at least as preceived by most of the rest of the world.
I would like to point a few things about this though. First, despite people's complaint about our media, a lot of our boo-boos, criminal behaviors, and plain bad news just does not make it the evening news here. That may be hard to believe for the 'luv W' crowd, but things in Iraq and Afghanistan are actually reported to more negatively / accuratly (you choose) than what we see here. Hence, opinion is worse over there than here.
From the servicemen I hear a more positive view, but that view has been declining over time. Let's grant that there are good things 'we' do and a fair bit of that goes under or unreported. There are a lot of decent troops over there trying their best with having been dealt a pretty crappy hand.
And, conversly there are more than a few bad apples too. And these folks do indeed do pretty bad things to the natives and a blind eyes is turned. Yeah, I hear stories of that as well.
-Is the world safer?
Stats that count terrorist incidents say no it is not. This is pretty hard to argue against. Even annecdotally it is hard if you pay attention to the news / blogs from around the world.
Might it be some day? Perhaps so, but clearly the current methodologies do not seem to gerneate trends in the right direction.
-What are the threats to safety?
Countless, but the biggies are probably
1) Iraqi causing a wider conflict, or becoming a hot bed of terrorism. This is a very dangerus wild card and its does not look like its trending well at all. Normally I am a big picture / underlying causes type person, but this one is such a hot potato that it is number one in my book.
2) Poor focus on dealing with the education (or lack there of) in both certain areas of the Middle East and (believe it or not or not) here as well. Without some mutual understanding, we are surely not going to solve much of anything unless we suppose the "Glass 'em all and let god sort 'em out" option.
3) Not addressing terrorism as primarily a police enforcement issue, but rather as a military issue.
4) Losing moral superiority by refusing to play by the rules... Whether that be getting all dodgy about Geneva Conventions. Or, by fighting terrist while supporting 'our own terrorists'. etc.
-What are some solutions?
Oooh. A biggie, well I will post tomorrow, its getting late
All well stated and seems to me pretty objective. I too interact with service members in theatre and recently back, and reports I get correspond quite well with those you share. It is one thing to say that we're fighting them over there so we won't have to fight them here, and there's a bit of truth to that. However, I think its pretty clear that we are being much more effective at generating new terrorists and U.S. haters in the Muslim world and now closer to home in our own hemisphere than we are at eliminating them. "Staying the course" is losing the hearts and minds of those we should be working to win.
Mark Greene
Texas Democrat in the Middle
It is not right or wrong! Yes we are in a new kind of world war that involves covert use of WMD's, however only the rules have changed and not the objectives. We own the skies so lets use them and use them good! No more boots on any ground where no positive I.D. is in use!!! How goofy - checking every other car and anyone who is not smiling? - Earn Snyder
Author "$aving the bureaucracy - Killing the beast"
Modern Progressive Independent
www.appyp.com/fix_main.html
fenris and my friend Mark are correct that US policies create more terrorists. However you are not right in assuming Iraq and Israel are the reasons. Since the latest aborted terror attacks were in Denmark this week and Germany on July 30 and those countries do not support US policies in general, you have to wake up and realize the Radical Islamists are at war with the West. They hate our religions, culture and equal treatment of women. Even if the US dramatically changed foreign policy they would still have us as number one enemy. We have an unrelenting enemy and have to stand up to the threat while we try to educate them. Meanwhile the Imams are preaching hate at the madrasses worldwide. These people have to be deported back to their country of origin. England has just started to do this but the West has to cooperate and weed these hatemongerers out. We and the rest of the world cannot be safer until this is done.
Al, first I will concede that the problem is certainly more widespread than Iraq & Israel. The real conflict is between radical Islam (circa 400 AD) and radical Christianity (circa 100AD), with a liberal dose of exploitative capitalism and western decadence thrown in.
Other countries don't even make the effort to assimilate that we do, and it is undrstandible (not defensible) that their segregated minorities would be ripe for radicalization. I think that moderate leaders of all persuasions would agree that Christian, Muslim, Jew, Hindu, Buddhist, aeteist, agnostic, etc. can peacefully coexist and interact. The problem isn't Islam, Christianity or Judaism, but radicalism. And the environment that allows radicalism to propogate and fester is that of intolerance, exploitation and unequal opportunity.
I have long been a fan of halon fire suppression systems, which work by eliminating the oxygen on which a flame depends. The power of the radical Imam's in the madrassas and of our own incindiary fundamentalists which nobody seems to want to mention is drawn from poverty and ignorance. Give people the opportunity to better their lives and their childrens'(read don't support dictators and despots), and educate them so that science and math hold more sway than supernatural superstition, and religion and its more radical elements will revert to their proper sphere of inflence.
The majority of muslims don't hate us, but our foreign policy and sloppy execution of late is making it more likely that they will. We can and must do better...
Mark Greene
Texas Democrat in the Middle
Retired but Active
Sorry, but I disagree with your analysis. The MUSLIMS have been behaving pretty much they way they are behaving now for nearly 5000 years (or as long as we have any type of records). They have ALWAYS been a violent people regardless of WHAT country they are from or where they reside. Granted, there are SOME that are less violent and radical than others but these make up such a small percentage of the total as to be all but meaningless.
I won't give the Christians or other religions a free pass however. There really are not many more groups of people that are so dogmatic, single vision, and convinced that they, and they alone, hold the key to eternal salvation. This is total nonsense, of course. But, the Christians and MOST other religions do not even come close to the total insanity of the Muslims. A brief review of Muslim history and the way the wars have been fought in the Middle East for hundreds of years should be enough to give you pause to reconsider what you have said.
Of course, there is not much we can do about it except try to contain the spread of this violence. We were pretty successful at this for a long time but in the past 100 years or so we have not been nearly as successful. I believe that is because we have tried to be too accomodating and "friendly". This has only opened the door to more and more spreading of this vile belief system. The Koran teaches violence regardless of what others may say. To even suggest that Islam is a religion of "peace" is nonsense. Islam is a religion of violence. The basic tenant of this religion is that ALL non believers are the enemy and are doomed to spend eternity in hell. NO tolerance for even the slightest devience and if one does not believe in the Islamic religious code then he MUST be an enemy of GOD. This is intolerable and only additional violence by the rest of the world will prevent a complete takeover, eventually, by these moronic people that really do believe that by committing suicide in the name of their God they will go to heaven and bask in the glory of a thousand virgins and all that other decadent stuff that they rail so much about while here on earth.
No point in trying to be nice when discussing this since it will do absolutely NO good. Being mean sounding will probably not accomplish much more but at least it is not just another attempt at pandering to one or more groups that really could give a crap about the rest of the world.
Darryel's assesment Of "MUSLIMS" simply is wrong beyond belief. I work, play, and dine with Muslims everyday and find them enmass to be as civil (if not more so) and as secular as other major religious cultures. And like other major religions, somewhere there is a murdering bunch of fanatics. US policy has been to foster that number among muslims while they "pray" for that number among christains. The praying is not always for civility to say the least.
There is no where to start toward a safer world with Darryel's thinking.
Bill, "for what we are together"
I think one of the things I find most discomfiting about our current situation is that there are far too many Americans, the bulk of whom claim to be Christians, who are altogether too welcoming of the notion of a "Holy War" between western Christianity and eastern Islam. I know it will fall on deaf ears, but will reiterate Jesus' words: Blessed be the Peacemakers.
It rather floors me that so many Americans at the outset of the 21st century are comfortable with the idea of destroying the world in conflicts over unproveable ideologies (Judaism, Christianity and Islam) born before the onset of and frankly the causative factors of the Dark Ages...
Mark Greene
Texas Democrat in the Middle
Retired but Active
Bill: Yes, and I once had a VERY good friend that was as nice (acting) as anyone could want. He went to church, treated his family well, worked hard, and was, from all appearances, a model citizen. BUT, he was arrested, tried, and convicted for sex crimes against children (of both sexes). This behavior had been going on for years before he was finally caught. AND, horrors, I used to allow my daughter to spend the night with his daughter!
Just because YOU have Muslim friends who appear to be very nice and well mannered and etc... does not, by any means, prove that MUSLIMS, as a group, are anything but violent and dogmatic. Remember, we have seen, time and again, instances where "nice" muslims have been caught associating and abetting known members of terrorist organizations. The simple matter is that the MUSLIM religion, Islam, requires violence as the accepted method of dealing with infidels that do not support the Muslim/Islam causes. This has been true for thousands of years and is still true today.
I know you do not like to hear this but I suggest you, on your own without any suggestions from me or anyone else, conduct a reasonable amount of research into the Islamic religion and basic beliefs. Unless we keep them under control our entire way of life is at grave risk. And, the longer we mealy mouth and pussy foot around in Iraq and other hotspots, the closer we are to dramatic possibly irreversable damage from this "religion". Sorry, but that is just the way it is. If you do not want to accept that, fine. But just remember that someone once told you what is likely to happen and you were too "nice" and too unbiased or non prejudiced to pay attention.
...when an unstoppable force meets an immoveable object? Have been reading some interesting articles of late on the origins of the universe and the near big-bang events which brought about the modern universe as we know it - one much different in nature and composition from that which originally evolved...
Mark Greene
Texas Democrat in the Middle
Retired but Active
Bill: Just curious. Did you do any research? If so, what did you find?
I find it difficult to believe that you did not discover that Muslims still treat their women as virtual slaves and can, at their whim, cut off their hands, other indignities and torture, and can even KILL them with impunity. Yes, there are a couple of countries that have large NON Muslim populations in the Middle East that do not engage in these practices but, for the most part, this is the norm for Saudi Arabia, Iraq, Pakistan, etc...
The Muslims also teach and believe that ANY person that is NOT a believer in the Muslim faith and practices will absolutely go to hell and since they are all "infidels" their life is worthless. The Muslim stated GOAL is to rule the entire world and rid it of all infidels. Whether this takes 100 years, 1000 years, or 10000 or mor years is immaterial. It is their guiding principle and goal throughout the Muslim world.
This religion and ALL that practice it are a clear and present danger to the rest of humanity and we MUST contain them (at the very least). If they ever get the upper hand, we are doomed!
Darreyl Wrote:
"This religion and ALL that practice it are a clear and present danger to the rest of humanity and we MUST contain them (at the very least)."
What strategy should we use to contain the roughly 1 billion Muslims in the world.(Cambridge Fact Finder says .9 Billion, World Almanac says 1.1 billion)
I do not think all of them would fit in Guantanamo. Also, I think it will be difficult to find all of them. Muslims come from every race and ethnic background.
Darreyl also wrote:
"The MUSLIMS have been behaving pretty much they way they are behaving now for nearly 5000 years (or as long as we have any type of records)."
Is the number 5000 a typo? If not, Mohammed is even more amazing than his followers claim. He was not born until late in the Sixth Century BCE. Perhaps he was a master of time travel as well as a prophet.
It will be difficult to deal with our "enemies" if we cannot even decide who they are.
Just Dale
Mercy, Mercy, Mercy
Retired but Active
I did not suggest imprisonment OR death for the Muslims. I suggested that we must CONTAIN them. By this I mean that we must keep them (at least as many as possible) in the Middle east. Yes, we have Muslims in every country in the world and the containment of them would be much more difficult. We have laws that protect their civil rights and all sorts of other laws in different countries that address their rights. BUT, we CAN do much to "contain" them, even here. We could simply refuse to shop at any of their stores or businesses. We could refuse to register for ANY courses they might teach in any of our colleges. We can simply ignore them in our everyday activities. We can vigilently and thoroughly ENFORCE our laws and anti-terror attempts to make their lives miserable enough that many of them would leave or convert.
I am not naive enough to believe that all (or even any) of these actions will be taken by the majority of Americans. But they will be taken by some and this will be better than doing nothing. Instead of spending BILLIONS of dollars each year in foreigh aid and "humanitarian" relief to Muslim countries we could simply leave them to their own resourcefulness. We could take drastic and immediate action when ANY Muslim attempts to harm us in ANY way whatsoever.
While the MUSLIMS were not called MUSLIMS for 5000 years, the fact stil remains that the ancestors of the present day Muslims did as much to impact their present day behavior as did their prophet Mohammed. These people from the beginnings of recorded history have been violent (killing and maiming their own people and any others that disagreed with them). After the onset of the Islamic RELIGION this violence spread even more to EVERY region in the Middle East. This RELIGION lends support to the behaviors that many of their ancesters exhibited for thousands of years and made it more acceptable as the "normal" way of life for them. Could all of this hate today be simply a manifestation of their unbridled ENVY of most other civilized nations? Even their "leaders" with their billions in oil money do not give a twit about the common people but, instead, continue to support the notion that their plight is the fault of the "rest of the world" and the United States in particular.
Dear Darreyl
I owe you apologies on two accounts. First my reply was petty. Second, I got Mohammed's birthdate wrong. He was born late in the 6th Century ACE not BCE.
What I really wanted to get across is that for me fighting is not the answer. I really believe that Christ was right when he said, "Love your enemies," and Buddha when he said that, "Hatred cannot be fought with hatred, this is an immutable law."
FOR ME (the only person I am qualified to speak for) my experience has been that when I act in fear and judgement my life gets worse in all ways...spiritually, emotionally, financially and healthwise. When I act with love and kindness (which I sometimes manage to do) then my life gets better. This rule has applied even when bad things have happened to me. For instance since 9/11 my life has consisted of:
Cancer (operation on morning of 9/11, can you believe it?);
Multiple hospitalizations for bipolar disorder (including 30 or so ECT treatments);
Loss of a successful 22 year career in international business consulting;
Blad-de-blah-de-blah, sorry for whining. You get the idea.
In each of these cases acting with love and kindness was essential to sustaining the spiritual strength to get me through the rough times. I do not know why this works, I just know that it does. I do not know why gravity works but it does. If I jump off the roof I will break my arm. If I act with fear and judgement I destroy the things that make my life worth living. I don't like it. I would rather be free of both gravity and the need to act with love and kindness. What I want doesn't seem to matter...I don't get to make the rules.
Like I said, this is ONLY MY EXPERIENCE. I have neither the will or the wisdom to speak for anyone else. I am certain that many more bad things (along with many good ones) will happen to me before I die. I am equally certain that acting with love and kindess will make the bad easier to bear and make the good taste even sweeter.
Just Dale
Just Dale, don't know if you picked up on it yet but we Buddhists are something of a minority here and elsewhere. Hang in - we'll hopefully be around to pick up the pieces...
Mark Greene
Texas Democrat in the Middle
Retired but Active
Just Dale: Your response to my comments demonstrate a truly caring and thoughtful attitude on your part and I respect this very much.
I am not usually a violent person. I do not pick on anyone and I do not start fights. However, I will, and have all my life, fight to protect those things that I firmly believe in and to eliminate those things that I believe are a danger to my family, my friends, my country, and me. I firmly believe that the Muslim religions (in all its forms and wherever its practitioners may live) IS a definite danger to all of the above and to our way of life. If we allow this international plague to spread unabeted we will be supporting the destruction of our freedom and the freedoms of most of the rest of the world.
Regardless of anything else, I believe the Muslims when they state over and over again and when it is embodied in their Koran and other written religious books that ANY nonbeliever is an infidel and that it is the OBLIGATION of every believer to eliminate, by whatever means necessary, all the rest. This belief cannot be disputed and any attempt by any diplomat to avoid saying it (which is common amongst the diiplomats from the Middle East)fools a lot of people and only lulls us into a false sense of security. We MUST do whatever is necessary to stop this insidious spread of a religion that runs counter to EVERY OTHER religious belief in the entire world.
It is not as though we are talking about "Protestants" or "Christianity" or "Buddists" or any other practice that has as a basic tenat "live and let live" and do not normally engage in HOLY WAR against all the rest. This activity is almost UNIQUE to the Muslims.
I have to object to this statement by Darryel:
"It is not as though we are talking about "Protestants" or "Christianity" or "Buddists" or any other practice that has as a basic tenat "live and let live" and do not normally engage in HOLY WAR against all the rest. This activity is almost UNIQUE to the Muslims."
I can't speak for Buddhists, but Christians have engaged in "holy wars" to extend their power throughout history. Two examples are The Crusades to reclaim land from the Muslims and to kill "infidels" with impunity and the Inquisition to torture and kill based on innuendo and/or lack of conformity to the prevailing religious doctrine.
To state that violence is unique to Muslims is a gross generalization - and it is also inaccurate.
Unfortunately, people having been waging war under the banner of God (whichever God it is) for as long as there has been religion.
It truly concerns me that in your fear (and you are by no means alone) and your response to it, you become much more of the problem than the solution. The Islamic radicals want the fight that you seem to crave - the difference being that it doesn't make a hill of beans to them whether they win or lose. It is impossible to defeat miltarily an enemy that welcomes death. Impossible.
I am no Koranic scholar, but I do know that their high Imams are empowered to issue rulings that have very much the same weight relative to their scriptures and customs as western religions interpretations, be they papal or other, have in ours. The result on our side of the equation is that we no longer cut off the hands of thieves (although the Bible says to) or stone adulterers to death. Prosperity, opportunity, comity and reason will generate much more positive and lasting results than war and violence. Ghandi did not defeat the British using your tactics...
Rolling tanks into Bahgdad with John 3.16 painted on them and refering to our little misadventure as a Crusade was much poorer politics than most choose to recognize. If you insist on having a "Holy War," which is exactly what you are proposing, don't expect it to ever end. And don't expect to win - for there is no winning such a conflict...
Mark Greene
Texas Democrat in the Middle
There you go again; Darryel is the problem but Mark knows best; it must be wonderful to always be right.
The only thing you said that makes sense is we will never win the war, however it is more important that we do not lose the war.
The Muslim terrorists in London are educated Middle-class men in their twenties. Most have all the opportunity to live a fruitful happy existence, but they have chosen to wage war on the West, because their Imans have brainwashed them. The Muslim goal is to overpopulate the Western countries that are naive enough to let them in, and have 6-10 babies per household. Give them another 100 years and the plan will work. The Koran demands world domination and Infidels must die. An Al Jazeera poll today of 40,000 Arabs showed 50% support for Bin Laden. Unfortunately most of the EU is too intimidated to do or say anything that will offend these people.
It is childish to argue about the Crusades and Witch Trials and Inquisitions, how about the Borgias and Oliver Cromwell?
The real answer is the West has matured through education and modernity and Islam has not been alowed to.
Obviously we cannot beat them in a military fashion, but we must understand our enemy; they cannot be placated by kindness and respect.
...unfortunately. Or maybe your sources are better than mine. You have the 9/12/01 poll results available?
I fear your reported poll results could be accurate - would like to see what that poll would have said on September 12, 2024? Probably 10-15% tops. We made our own bed - now we're sleeping in it...
Mark Greene
Texas Democrat in the Middle
Wow! 191 posts on this topic alone - and counting!
Many of us Unity '08'ers have been wondering: Where does this all lead? Will these discussions lead to Unity '08 policies - or even themes?
If you're interested in adding some cohesiveness and direction to the Cauldron of Alphabet Soup that is the Unity '08 Shoutbox, please visit http://unitysupporters.com/wiki/?title=UnityWiki:Community_Portal
The proposal there is to create a site where a Unity '08 Political Platform can be created in a collaborative fashion by on-line users. Such a site would allow individuals to post topics and entries as well as vote on such postings. And you don't need to be a programmer to participate. (If you can post here, you've got what it takes to post on a Wiki).
We're at the very early stages of using this "Terrorism" topic as a prototype demonstration of how collaborative voting can make sense out of... well, chaos. (When you get there, scroll to the bottom and look for: 10) Terrorism Vote
Come on - click on the link. You know you want to....
Two quick thoughts before I start my day...
1) I would suggest you read the following article, paying particular attention to paragraphs 3 & 4 which describe devout Iraqi Muslims who seek order and civilization in their homeland:
http://www.boston.com/news/world/middleeast/articles/2006/09/19/bombers_and_gunmen_kill_at_least_41_across_iraq/
2) I would hope that you Islamic scholars out there would point out all the routes to heaven that involve pathways other than killing infidels in the name of Allah. I can assure you that the vast majority of Muslims would prefer this route to their eternal salvation. Please keep in mind that even for the zealots, 1,000 virgins is less than a decades worth pacing oneself - barely the blink of an eye in the face of eternity...
Mark Greene
Texas Democrat in the Middle
I appreciate the sentiment and hope the interactive Wiki project gets up to full steam quickly and in a user friendly format. The unfortunate reality - and I doubt I'm alone here - is that there are many people like myself who are not bloggers or "wiki-philes" who will not unless forced, and perhaps not then, take the time to become wiki proficient. It is up to those who are inclined and able to generate a format and coding that generates a simple user-friendly forum for actionable interactivity. I know this takes work, time, money, etc. - hopefully you can get the founders to buy in. I believe a site which is highly interactive, which Unity 08 is not, will garner enough online support to underwrite its own expense. Whether that would/will translate to sufficient monetary support to drive a ticket remains to be seen...
Mark Greene
Texas Democrat in the Middle