How to solve root Terrorism?
Radicals propose killing all infidels irregardless of occupation. What if they get a bomb? We know they're crazy enough to use it and we can't retaliate against an enemy withuot a country...
After we leave their land, how do we follow-up to win the 'war of ideology' so radicals won't want to kill us?
If we leave their land and stop meddling in their business, the radicals will not be able too recruit as many new members by pointing out how evil the USA is for invading them.
However, that just helps with the future generations. What about the current crop? I think most of them are fighting us out of resentment due to our occupation and interference. Islam was just a unifying force to get them into the fight. Most of these guys will just stop because their goal of expelling us will have been accomplished.
The rest of them are the ones to worry about. The real religious zealots for whom it is God's will to spread Islam and kill infidels. They'll be a small percentage but it will still be a significant number. On the other hand, we'll probably have more support against them from the average Muslim and the rest of the world. We fight these guys with intelligence and precision instead of stomping around the world in jack boots.
All your voter base are belong to us!
How about if we just leave them and their countries alone? Maybe some private Americans can fund some hospitals or schools in Syria or Iran as a face of goodwill? (not go there and build, just private citizens supplying funds.)
We also can stop supporting the Zionists take over of the middle east.
We don't follow up anything. The radicals want to kill anything that isn't radical. You can't reason with that, you can't negotiate with that. Unless directly attacked, it's best we just leave them alone. Our interference has given an "enemy" to unite against. If we stop interfering-- Over time, their movement will decline.Originally Posted by Architect4DrPaul
It's important to remember that we aren't even their main target. They want to attack the people in power in their own countries and Israel.
What we should do is just mind our business, talk to everyone, listen to everyone, trade with everyone, and allow the the rule of law to work. Take Switzerland for example-- They haven't been in a war since 1815.
Easy, by doing the exact opposite of the current prevailing Neocohen strategy of invade the world, invite the world.
Pogo: The enemy is us.
Your question is often poised by many concerned citizens now. It was discussed at length by our founding fathers who faced the same thing then. They faced a vastly superior army and borders and towns that were much more difficult to defend then than now.
Their solution was to reassert every citizen's right to keep and bear arms and to defend themselves from rogue nuts, criminals and distributed attacks. They coupled this by providing for a "common defense" against focused attack as a duty and responsibility of our federal government. Both, taken in combination, proved to be an absolutely effective deterrent to secure ourselves from terrorists and tyranny from any rational foe. Even Churchill borrowed this approach much later when he said "...we will fight you from the rooftops..." as to the depth and determination of the citizens of Britain from invasion.
But what about the irrational ones? The minds of idiots are a closed book to sane people. The people of Iran are all not idiots, nor are the people of Iraq. Nevertheless, some of them are and we have our own bunch of crazies to add to the pot as well. Your statement about "radicals" and their paranoia always begins with a nut forming a false premise (we want to do them harm); the rest is then logical.
We can't put bars up everywhere for it will be just a matter of perspective of who is in prison and who is not. This is why we, as supporters of Ron Paul, so strongly object to The Patriot Act and the isolationism of "no-see-'um" war mongers that covertly come up with plot after plot of an imagined foe and the inane and insane reasons for war.
We know now that there were no weapons of mass destruction, there was no connection of Iraq to 911, there was no welcoming of occupation as liberation, and it certainly did not deter any of the nuts that were responsible for 911; if anything, it emboldened them. And it cost us a trillion dollars. It could be best summed up like the swamp fellow Pogo who wisely said: "We've come upon the enemy and it is us."
Ron Paul's asserts three constitutional principles of 1) avoid foreign entanglements, 2) provide for a strong and adequate defense (against focused attacks) and 3) defend the 2nd amendment (against distributed attacks and those that would want to disarm us) and they are a rational approach to national defense.
With regard to the second part of your question, trading and talking to people sorts out the rational ones from the irrational ones and brings them to our side. The rational ones will then curb their irrational minority. The will use their vigilance just like we use ours to see that the nuts are found out and controled. China-U. S. tensions were defused, if you recall, with a ping pong competition that emphasized how our peoples were alike, not how we were different. Both governments could repel a focused invasion many times over and adding to these capabilities did nothing to make either side more secure. Before the thaw, diplomatic isolationists on both sides pushed toward war by imposing trade sanctions, belligerent and bellicose rhetoric and constantly escalated the tension and distrust. When we started talking to the rational people and started trading with them, it defused this nonsense. This is Ron Paul's truism. It is obvious.
Your question is a good one. This is why we need a debate, not a media circus. Thanks for your question.
http://wiki.clampit.us
ClampIt
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Samantha_Smith
How to stop others from obtaining weapons has had governments, despots and tyrants in a quandary since the beginning of recorded history. Nobody has been able to figure it out yet.
America won the race to build the ultimate WMD. State secrets, top security clearance, etc.
Now England, France, Russia, China, North Korea, India and Israel have the bomb. All of this "proliferation started with theft of American "secrets".
Pakistan is Islamic.
Pakistan has the bomb.
Pakistan is about to fall to a radical Islamic coup.
We have been totally fucked by the machine
It feels lonely and politically incorrect to say this, but someday it's going to be realized that the atomic bomb isn't so terrifying unless you actually get caught in the vicinity of one or downwind from one.
The best way to fight these radicals is through peace. Lets keep in mind that there have been terrorists and radicals throughout all of human history. This is not new. The only way were ever going to get a lasting peace is by leaving them alone and letting them live their own lives.
The thing about Middle eastern culture is that we dont understand it. Whenever we try to intefer or get involved, they always lash back against us. We simply cannot control them and trying only ends up in disaster. For the most part, they are peaceful and dont want to go war, but a radical few are willing to sacrfice their lives to attack us. The first thing we gotta do is stop giving them reasons to attack us. Once we do that, their numbers will stop growing. If there are a couple of super-radical terrorists like Osama bin laden, then we can go after them with special forces and hired people and etc. But the truth is we can never truly stop the radicalism, no more than we could ever stop robberies, murders or from people drinking alcohol. We can only try our best to stop it from growing and making it culturally unncessary to be radical.
Some strategies that work for things like drugs and gang violence is by getting to the young kids into after-school programs and by helping them get a education.
Various programs and charity help, and economic prosperity will promote peace and will dissuade violence and radicalism.
Instead of putting sanctions on them and attacking them militarily, we need to promote, trade, growth and peace. Only by doing these things can we ever hope to achieve peace.
The thing about nuclear weapons, is that poor radicalists aren't smart enough and dont have the resoucres to build such weapons. Only governments do and its highly unlikely they would hand off weapons to rogue terrorists that they have no control over. And if we promote, diplomacy, trade and peace with other governments, than other governments wont have any motivation to attack us. If some crazy radicals want to attack us, then we have every right to get them with special forces and trained people, but we can't go attack whole countries. Its just not smart or effective.
We need to stop putting war on the "table" and only keep peace, trade and diplomacy on it. If we can count on our citizens to take care of themselves in a free market, then we can count on the people of the middle east to do the same. They dont need to be told what to do by us, they are perfectly capeable of taking care of themsleves. History has proven this..
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote