Terrorism

1. 60

   ahmadraza212posted 14 years ago

   My question is that:
   Can we stop terrorism in our world?
   
   and in reply Mr. SimeyC says
   
   Wow what a great question; whether there is an answer or not I do not truly know! Terrorism often stems from one faction or another feeling they are being mistreated - whether this is perceived or actual mistreatment doesn't really matter.
   Where the 'mistreatment' is so bad that the 'victim' feels they have no choice but to fight back we often see acts of terrorism. Look at Ireland, India, Iran, Iraq, France (in WWII) etc - there are acts of terrorism in each of these which were for a cause and due to a direct or perceived mistreatment.
   While terrorism isn't the answer, it often is the only 'act' that a desperate people can do. So can we stop terrorism?
   The only way to truly do this is to remove all the conditions that breed terrorism - racism, hunger, hatred, religion, sport etc - while people have different and opposing views, there's always likely to be someone who is surpressed. Removing all 'arguments' should lead to no terrorism....
   So to answer simply - Np - I cannot see a way in which we can remove all symptoms that lead to someone being suppressed - there will always be someone who feels downtrodden in society despite society's best intentions..
   What is your opinion?

   replyreport
   1. 70

      rhamsonposted 14 years agoin reply to this

      To remove terrorism would take cooperation on a huge scale by many different players.  If you take into account the brainwashing that accompanies the radical Islam factor it only compounds it.
      
      One way the United States has found is the covert payoff such as we saw in Iraq with the Sons of Iraq who were converted to freedom fighters when it became more profitable for them. There were millions and millions of dollars that went unaccounted for once the invasion was complete and the task of moderating the government was upon us.
      
      It is in mans nature to commit acts of violence and especially for a cause.  With this in mind there is not much one can do but try to help where we can and fight where we have to and duck at the appropriate moment.

      replyreport
   2. 0

      Poppa Bluesposted 14 years agoin reply to this

      I don't believe we can stop it. There will always be someone that believes they can accoplish their goals by using terror tactics.

      replyreport
   3. 0

      cosetteposted 14 years agoin reply to this

      no. but we can try to prevent as many incidents as possible, for example, using bomb-sniffing dogs at airports. so dogs offend muslim people's sensibilities, so what? everybody in America has one thing or another that offends them. this PC stuff is out of control.

      replyreport
      1. 70

         rhamsonposted 14 years agoin reply to this

         But is this the game now.  It seems as if it is a great chess game with us as the pawns.
         
         Are we to try and head attacks off at the pass the stategy or are we to try and find out if backing Israel is a sustainable tactic or is our thirst for oil and the conquest for it our real motivation or are we about spreading our form of government to an incompatible culture?
         
         The battle seems to pale against the many other reasons we and our politicians have come up with.

         replyreport
         1. 0

            cosetteposted 14 years agoin reply to this

            well i would like to just turn their country to glass but that's pretty extreme...(just a fantasy, mind you)

            replyreport
2. 57

   C.J. Wrightposted 14 years ago

   Lets be honest here. When the average American thinks terrorism what do they see? An Islamic guy filled with hate blowing something up, right? I mean that really is what goes through most peoples minds is it not? Then of course you have those on the extreme, who everytime they hear anything that remotely sounds like terrorism they start reminding us of Timothy McVeigh, "See he was white and christian!"  So lets address these two types of terrorism. The first which is based in radicalizing a religion can in fact be stopped. The disorganized, grabastic piecies of crap like McVeigh who sat around with a few others complaining about the government cant. They are too random, they generally do act somewhat independently.
   
   Lets also be honest that not everything we call terrorism is actually terrorism, but it is a handy lable to demonize someone or a group.

   replyreport
   1. 70

      rhamsonposted 14 years agoin reply to this

      The funny thing about terrorism is the way it plays out for both sides.
      
      The terrorist wants to draw attention to his or her plight by creating a need to be recognized.  This form is usually violent but can have other manifestations such as societal or economic means to make it be known.  No matter what way it is effected there is a need by a few to affect many for their cause to recieve notice.  This is usually after much effort has been ignored by the masses.  Also take into account some moral reason thrown in can generate a lot of credibility.
      
      The victims of the terrorism on the other hand feel the brunt of the violence or other methods and wish it to stop at any cost.  This is usually done without consideration of the terrorists reasons but out of moral outrage that this could be put upon them without any provocation.
      
      Both groups claim a moral highground and the misunderstandings continue.  Do the victims give in and allow other terrorist groups to use the same tactics?  And do the terrorists just lay down and let the injustice go on without retaliation?
      
      How do you get these two opposing groups to come to an understanding when both claim a moral high ground?  This I think is at the crux of the matter and will take someone far more intelligent than me to figure out.

      replyreport
      1. 57

         C.J. Wrightposted 14 years agoin reply to this

         I think we have to realize that there is not a one size fits all solution here. When it comes to the Middle East for example, there are HUGE Cultural differences. So understanding one another is extremely difficult. Western cultures scream about "Human Rights" like only they get to define them. In fact we wouldn't know or care about "Human Rights" issues in the Middle East if it weren't for the oil sitting under the sand.
         Western society and Middle Eastern society is a bad mariage in my opinion. Some people will never get along. If there ever was an opportunity it was lost long ago. In short my solution, is to give the Middle East what it wants. To be left alone by Western Society.

         replyreport
         1. 70

            rhamsonposted 14 years agoin reply to this

            I agree with everything you say but can Big Oil learn to live without its' major source?

            replyreport
            1. 57

               C.J. Wrightposted 14 years agoin reply to this

               Absolutely. China is drilling in the caribean....and even off the coast of Florida. Why? Because we found it and wont take it...so they will. This is important because China is capable of whats called "Slant" drilling. This means they can sit off the coast of Cuba and lay pipe all the way into US teritory and suck the oil right out from under us. Remember we want that oil in the middle east not so much because we NEED it, but because statrigically its better for us if someone else doesn't have it! Like China or Russia.
               About 20% of our imports of crude oil and petroleum products come from the Persian Gulf countries of Bahrain, Iran, Iraq, Kuwait, Qatar, Saudi Arabia, and United Arab Emirates. Our largest sources of net crude oil and petroleum product imports are Canada and Saudi Arabia.
               Sources of Net Oil Imports:
               
               Canada (20.1%)
               Saudi Arabia (13.8%)
               Venezuela (10.5%)
               Nigeria (8.8%)
               Mexico (8.7%)

               replyreport
               1. 70

                  rhamsonposted 14 years agoin reply to this

                  While Canada is a big supplier it has only been a recent developement due to the high cost of Middle Eastern oil.  It was only after this that the extraction process from the sand base became feasible.  Big Oil would rather have more say and a cheaper source.  Mind you the price won't drop but the control is what is important.
                  
                  Saudi Arabia is still a thorn in the side of the terrorists as it is the country that pushed Bin Laden away when Kuwait was invaded and allowed the infidels to set up operations on the Holy Islamic lands.
                  
                  Hugo Chavez is still something the US Government is trying to topple as he wants fair market value and trade considerations that the US is begrudgingly conceding.
                  
                  These top suppliers are troublesome to say the least and big oil wants the wars to continue as well as Pakistan to become unstable enough to allow another invasion.  This would complete the Oil & Gas line to go through and have total control without worrying about interference from more established governments.  There is Iran in the wings that could provide the same access if it could become an option.

                  replyreport
                  1. 57

                     C.J. Wrightposted 14 years agoin reply to this

                     Agreed, however we have millions of barrels in reserve and oil sitting off our coast and interior. The fact is as you stated the issue of "Controll" is of greatest concern.
                     Even conservatives(most, I suspect) would agree with Nuclear energy and augmenting with solar, wind and hydroelectric power for the nations energy grid. The fact is as you stated the issue of "Controll" is of greatest concern.

                     replyreport
                     1. 70

                        rhamsonposted 14 years agoin reply to this

                        Well control is the 800 pound gorilla in the room as that is the basis by which all of this upheaval has sprung.  As a capitalist based country and with the proper amount of control Big Business can just about bring any scenario it wants because of the lack of restriction from the bought government.  The least amount of investment with having the US fight a free to them war is the best case for them.  It is a lot easier than research and contracts and enviornmental caveats.

                        replyreport
                        1. 57

                           C.J. Wrightposted 14 years agoin reply to this

                           Foriegn trade/industry is the exact area that a capitalist economy should be controlled.....Its a problem no doubt. No one would care about bonus' and such if there were plenty of good paying jobs and a sound economy. One thing is for sure, the President ran on a platform of "Change" I firmly believe that during his term big changes will occur....to what end is the unknown.

                           replyreport
                           1. 70

                              rhamsonposted 14 years agoin reply to this

                              I agree, this is not the change I envisioned when Obama won the election.  The old Clinton staff and wall street lobbyists.  The war escallation and blame game running the place is not much different than the last moron in charge.
                              
                              Perhaps Americas quick fix penchant can be reviewed and real change can come about from us the citizenry?  Just a thought.

                              replyreport
                              1. 0

                                 Ken R. Abellposted 14 years agoin reply to this

                                 rhamson - I may be off-base here, but I do not think anyone other than President Obama's most rabid supporters, would applaud the "hope & change" put forward by the administration.
                                 
                                 He is beginning to look an awful lot like just a regular run of the mill politician angling & getting ready for the next election cycle.  Not the transformational leader the electorate thought it was getting.
                                 
                                 Evidently being President is much tougher than running for the office.  Anyway, just my two cents worth of opinion.

                                 replyreport
                                 1. 70

                                    rhamsonposted 14 years agoin reply to this

                                    Well they say the cream always rises to the surface.  That is if we are talking about milk.
                                    
                                    What rises to the top of the "slime on the hill"? How can we expect any better when the system is so entrenched in corruption?

                                    replyreport
                                    1. 0

                                       Ken R. Abellposted 14 years agoin reply to this

                                       Good questions.  I don't know the answer to them.  If I did I'd write a Hub or maybe a bestselling book. :>)

                                       report
                  2. 57

                     C.J. Wrightposted 14 years agoin reply to this

                     IMO Saudi Arabia is duplicitous. They have also let suspects go. If they wanted Bin Ladin handled he would have been dead a long time ago.

                     replyreport
         2. 68

            AdsenseStrategiesposted 14 years agoin reply to this

            Neither Western society nor Middle-Eastern society are monolithic. There are huge differences even between British and American society, or German and Swiss. And huge differences between Morocco and Tunisia, Dubai and Yemen. The one thing that has however stood out to me in my travels in Muslim countries is huge numbers of people's desire in fact for much that is "Western." Western media and pop culture, for example, are all over the place in many of these countries.

            replyreport
            1. 70

               rhamsonposted 14 years agoin reply to this

               I think our interest in the oil will never play well in the manipulation of their governments and that is the real determining factor in all of this.  While it is true that the Middle-East culture wishes to morf some Western Culture into their make up this is due to the youth and the global education they are recieving.  It would be best if we allowed them the access to Western Culture on their schedule but capitalism being what it is won't wait.

               replyreport
               1. 57

                  C.J. Wrightposted 14 years agoin reply to this

                  YEP, the more you force something on someone, typically the more they resist.

                  replyreport
            2. 57

               C.J. Wrightposted 14 years agoin reply to this

               Your being intelectually dishonest. Do American or Brittish condone "Honor Killings"? Do America, Brittish, German or Swiss societies condone female castration? A procedure that is explicitly designed so that female's can't enjoy intercourse?
               Do Do America, Brittish, German or Swiss societies run state run prostitution houses? There are these and many others. I too have traveled extensively. I have encountered people who seemed to "desire" western culture. I have also seen the opposite. I
               What I know is that there is a HUGE movement that is "Anti Western" in the middle east.

               replyreport
3. 76

   Shadesbreathposted 14 years ago

   Two ways to eliminate terrorism:
   
   1. Find a way to get a "chicken in every pot."
   
   2. Total annihilation of everyone who has any possibility of being one. (In ancient times, when you conquered a city, you killed ALL of the men, including children.  To leave an enemy alive, even a child, was asking for a knife in the back in 15 or so years. A good deal of terrorism today is due to wars that weren't won in this way.  The IRA and HAMAS being good examples.)
   
   I'm not arguing for either of them, just pointing out how to end it.  Neither is going to happen, so get used to terrorism.

   replyreport
   1. 0

      Ken R. Abellposted 14 years agoin reply to this

      Unfortunately, in the world we live in & the way humanity is wired, I think Shadesbreath's assessment is probably right. 
      
      I am not advocating number two & given the self-centric nature of the human heart, try as we might, I doubt it is possible to accomplish number one.
      
      Violence is a constant theme of history & as someone above pointed out, the word terrorist or terrorism produces a picture of an Islamic militant nowadays. 
      
      A hundred years ago, union organizers & anarchists were tagged as terrorists.  There were explosions & dynamite used on the streets of American cities. 
      
      In September 1920 a horse drawn cart (forerunner of the car bomb) was detonated on Wall Street at noontime.  Thirty-eight people were killed & although there were lots of suspects, I do not think that crime was ever really solved.   
      
      A perusal of history would reveal that one group's terrorist is the another group's freedom fighters.
      
      There's some thoughts.

      replyreport
      1. 76

         Shadesbreathposted 14 years agoin reply to this

         That 1920 bit is great.  Go figure, eh?  And yeah, technically, George Washington was a terrorist from a British perspective during the early days of the Revolution.

         replyreport
4. 0

   sneakorocksolidposted 14 years ago

   We need to teach the bad actors what terrorism really is and can anything pc.

   replyreport
5. 80

   bgpappaposted 14 years ago

   Terrorism has been around for centuries as a tactic used by those without power or perceived power.
   
   You can't stop it.  You can beat it though by not letting Terror and fear take over.

   replyreport
6. 59

   mikelongposted 14 years ago

   Operation Northwood............
   
   If there is no terrorism it can always be created.
   
   As long as we as a people, Americans and otherwise, continue to follow what the media conglomerates tell us then there will be no end to terrorism...
   
   There is far too much profit in the conflicts that follow....and too many loopholes to circumvent the Constitution that are created...
   
   Executive Order 11109 is a great example...

   replyreport
   1. 0

      Ken R. Abellposted 14 years agoin reply to this

      I'll reveal my ignorance...
      
      What is Operation Northwood? 
      
      What is Executive Order 11109?

      replyreport
      1. 70

         rhamsonposted 14 years agoin reply to this

         Check out these links.
         
         http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Northwoods
         
         http://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/ws/index.php?pid=59048

         replyreport
         1. 0

            Ken R. Abellposted 14 years agoin reply to this

            Thanks.   Both helpful.

            replyreport
7. 59

   mikelongposted 14 years ago

   Wikipedia hardly does this justice.  The documents can be found through google and should be read through in their entirety....

   replyreport
   1. 70

      rhamsonposted 14 years agoin reply to this

      Perhaps so.  But the gist is the same.

      replyreport
8. 59

   mikelongposted 14 years ago

   Another example of this can be seen through the recent out-of court settlement between Shell and the Ogono of Nigeria....especially in light of the recent terrorist attack this past week...

   replyreport
9. 61

   Red_Hot_Daveposted 14 years ago

   One man's terrorist is another man's freedom fighter.
   
   The way to defeat terrorism is to look at the causes, rather than being hellbent on tracking down the brainwashed minnows who commit the acts of terrorism.

   replyreport