Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[McDoomhammer]

quote: We've learned enough to know better. Terrorists with a safe place to harbor and train will eventually find a crack in our defenses. Faced with this problem, peace is not the answer.

I'm afraid I have to take exception to that.  You speak as though everything except war has been tried.  By that logic, the only way to end the terrorist threat is to eradicate every safe place for terrorism, which would amount to little less than the US dominating the entire globe by force or the threat thereof.  No, thank you.  If anything is most definitely not the answer, I contend that it is war.

Wars will never stop terrorism, because it is an ideology rather than a nation or a single group, and therefore cannot be conquered, hunted down, vanquished or destroyed- rather it is like a hydra, for every head you cut off, more will grow back to replace it.  War might buy temporary safety but also creates martyrs, grudges, fears.  Look at Afghanistan and Iraq- no longer under the control of the Taliban and Saddam, but Afghanistan is now something like the 3rd poorest nation on earth, and Iraq, years later, is still a bloody, war-torn mess where both the Iraquis and western troops are still being killed every day.  Don't these people have a reason to hate the western world?  They had nothing to do with 9/11, the only successful attack on US soil so far, but their entire lives are ruined.

The only realstic way to end the fear of terrorism is to extend the hand of peace and understanding.  Not to the terrorists themselves- you can't reason or argue with a fanatic.  But so long as we react to violence with violence, and the sad loss of innocent lives by destroying more, there will be people sympathetic to the terrorist cause.  We have to take responsibility for the ghastly messes we have created in the middle east and concentrate on showing the people there that we need not be enemies, in the hopes that one day there will be no-one left for the fanatics to recruit.

Yes, "why can't the US just leave everyone alone?" is simplistic and unrealistic.  The situation in Iraq is now very delicate and complex (although I don't think it need have become so).  There will always be extremists.  But at the moment fighting them with arms can only create more.

[Forumsdwarf]

quote:so long as we react to violence with violence, and the sad loss of innocent lives by destroying more, there will be people sympathetic to the terrorist cause.

What's missing from your analysis is the effect of not reacting to violence with violence, of Osama bin Laden's "Strong Horse Theory" and its successful application to the recruitment of terrorists.
Once you understand that both violence and nonviolence create more terrorists and that our military's low casualty rate permits sustained operations in perpetuity, the cost-benefit analysis simplifies to a comparison of two equilibrium equations, one balanced by terrorist deaths from natural causes, the other by terrorists killed by U.S. and Coalition Armed Forces.
Given the efficacy of our military it almost doesn't matter what the input disparities might be.
Even assuming an unfavorable recruitment ratio, say if appeasement provokes 100 new terrorists per year and war provokes 1000, if we kill 50% of terrorists per year we still break even in roughly 11 years.
If we get 80% we break even in less than 4.

quote:The only realstic way to end the fear of terrorism is to extend the hand of peace and understanding.  Not to the terrorists themselves ...

We're already doing that.  We're also fighting terrorists.  The two goals are not mutually exclusive.
As for understanding I find your restriction misguided.  Like Sun Tzu said it is important we understand our enemies.

[Helmaroc]

I thought on most forums political (and religion) related discussions were not allowed or frowned upon.  

[Forumsdwarf]

And yet we're allowed to say "fuck".

[Earthquake Damage]

quote:Originally posted by Helmaroc:
<STRONG>I thought on most forums political (and religion) related discussions were not allowed or frowned upon.   </STRONG>

That leaves two possibilities open:  Either you're mistaken or this isn't "most forums."  I'm leaning toward the latter.

[Helmaroc]

Hehe, not 'most forums' at all.

[Old School Gamer]

You can't write fuck on the side of aeroplanes, because it's obscene (Apocalypse Now quotes, mmm), but you can bomb random innocents with them, and that's patriotism!

But seriously, there's no reason to vote anyway, nowadays the Diebold machines do it for us.  Yes the US is now run by some behind the scenes group, and yes our media is entirely focused on making us a brutish war-loving people, and yes a lot of people are buying it hook-line-sinker.

It's not pretty, and so a lot of people don't want to look at it, but there it is.

But nothing or not much can be done about it,  the top 1% have us by the balls, as far as I can tell.  yay progress.

[Forumsdwarf]

quote:our media is entirely focused on making us a brutish war-loving people

Ridiculous.  Here's your homework assignment: can you tell me what the media reactions were to the Wounded Knee Massacre and the firebombing of Tokyo?

Now can you tell me what the media reactions were to Abu Ghraib and Operation Linebacker?

Final question: can you really not tell the difference?

The ethics of the two bombing campaigns are too complicated to go into, but Wounded Knee and Abu Ghraib were both clear-cut atrocities reported very differently.

Imagine Abu Ghraib reported like this:

"Man's Best Friend Is Terrorist's Worst Enemy"
"Meet Sparky, lovable 3-year-old Rottweiler and our newest secret weapon in the War on Terror ..."

It might be something out of Starship Troopers, but no article like that was ever written in America.  The media of America's past treated Colonel Forsyth and his men as heroes.  Wouldn't a brutal, war-loving media have done the same to the guards at Abu Ghraib?

[Fenrir]

quote:Originally posted by Old School Gamer:
<STRONG>our media is entirely focused on making us a brutish war-loving people </STRONG>

No, our media is focused on scaring the shit out of us so we'll be more controllable.

[Forumsdwarf]

So ... that would mean the media pretend to their obsessive pursuit of "ratings" as a cover story to throw the more gullible off the track of their insidious conspiracy to control us?
They must be pretty smart to chase Britney Spears and Paris Hilton around; I would almost believe the media care more about ratings than their own self-respect, never mind  their being in on a plan to take over the world worthy of Pinky and the Brain.

[Fenrir]

Okay, so 'focused' isn't quite the word for it, but they do that!

[Old School Gamer]

Is there a reason that every Hollywood movie has to glorify violence as though it were the greatest thing ever?  Same for a lot of TV shows.  Shows about investigating crime scenes?

Television and movies were nothing 40 years ago like they are today.  By media I mean the companies that produce the mass media that we consume, which only maybe a total of 20 white guys way up high have control over.

We have no choice of what is be presented to us to consume, and the vast majority of it is stuff which desensitizes us to violence.  Why do you think the US has so many domestic problems?  Why do you think so many of our citizens are in prison?  Why do you think all these kids have shot each other up in high schools, and now in colleges (not to mention the fact that they've been warped by psych meds all their lives) -- could consuming endless gluts of media where people are fucking each other up for glory have something to do with it?

Now, why would they present this type of media?  These same people who are running the most war-mongering and controlling country on the planet?

edit for grammar

[ February 26, 2008: Message edited by: Old School Gamer ]

[Earthquake Damage]

quote:Originally posted by Old School Gamer:
<STRONG>Why do you think so many of our citizens are in prison?</STRONG>

Drug policies?

[Fenrir]

quote:Originally posted by Old School Gamer:
<STRONG>Now, why would they present this type of media?  These same people who are running the most war-mongering and controlling country on the planet?</STRONG>

I have an entire conspiracy theory about this. However, I've no concrete evidence to support it, nor do I think myself capable of presenting it in any sort of intelligent and believable way, so I'll keep it to myself.

[Gaulgath]

quote:Originally posted by Old School Gamer:
<STRONG>could consuming endless gluts of media where people are fucking each other up for glory have something to do with it?
[ February 26, 2008: Message edited by: Old School Gamer ]</STRONG>

No.