I think the realistic goal is to neutralize large-scale organized terrorism. This won't keep loonies like Tim McVeigh or some Islamist crackpot from pulling off an attack now and then, but it will stop large scale operations that need hundreds of thousands of dollars and international connections to pull off.
Right now terror groups are organized across borders, and in some cases, actively supported by states. These organizations have to be squashed, and that's the hard part.
I don't think we realize how much we disrupted al Qaeda when we took Afghanistan. Certainly the remnants have regrouped in other nations, but they are still much less now than they would have been if we had left them alone. We have yet to suffer an attack on American soil since 9/11, although there could be no greater coup for the terror groups than to accomplish this. Somebody is doing something right.
There are still problem zones that need to be dealt with, and I have no easy answers.
Iran still supports terror, and is pulling the U.N. around by the nose while it continues nuclear research. Saudi Arabia, I hope, is getting a clue. Syria is a major problem, and if it was up to me, would be next on our list if we had a "list." Flattening the Baathist government of Syria would do worlds of good both in Iraq and in Israel. Western Pakistan is a hotbed, pouring crap into Afghanistan, and if the Pakistani government decides it's not going to worry about it, I don't know what we can do. North Korea does not have its own terrorists as such (at least outside its borders), but it's obvious that if they ever develop a working nuclear warhead, they would sell it to any terror group on Earth for the price of a new car.
I'm hearing a lot about terror organizations reorganizing in African nations. One hopes we are doing more behind the scenes than makes the headlines.
Just as a sidebar, look at the <a href="http://www.centennialofflight.gov/essay/Government_Role/security/POL18.htm"history of a specific form of terror: airline hijackings. Notice how who does the hijacking varies over the years, as does the motives and operations. Note also the differences between loners and parts of organized groups.
Current Events » in reply to What would end terrorism?
re: What would end terrorism?
The whole thread (91 posts)
- This just in: Turkey rewarded by Islamo-fascists for its moderate policy regarding the US coalition
- 25 dead and 390 injured - not all British
- What would end terrorism?
- re: What would end terrorism? Lileks comments.
- re: What would end terrorism?
- re: What would end terrorism?
- re: Discretion
- Post above might have some relevance to this thread
- Alternatives
- re: Alternatives
- re: Alternatives
- re: Alternatives
- re: Alternatives
- Continued
- the star chamber
- Perceptions
- Imminent threat and levels of proof
- "Nothing"
- How many Americans are you willing to sacrifice for your inability to make tough decisions? (n/t)
- Morality
- Then answer the question: how many? how much destruction?
- I didn't say that.
- Morality
- re: "Nothing"
- How many Americans are you willing to sacrifice for your inability to make tough decisions? (n/t)
- "Nothing"
- To be continued...
- Continued
- re: Alternatives
- re: Alternatives
- So, it's okay if YOU ask the question, not me. That's cool.
- re: Alternatives
- re: Alternatives
- Combination of approaches
- re: What would end terrorism?
- re: What would end terrorism?
- What would end terrorism?
- A CNN Article on this latest terror bombing
- 25 dead and 390 injured - not all British
