View Full Version : "War on Terrorism" - how to defeat them ?
Tactics that appear not to be working in a number of countries.
1) Attacking "suspect" countries/leaders
2) Increasing security measures
3) Setting threat levels
4) Restricting immigration
It has been proven that these following items are not the causes.
1) Poor education (i.e. London bombers)
2) Poor economic conditions (i.e. London Bombers)
3) Israeli occupation of Palestine (i.e. attacks after withdrawals)
None these appear to address the "Root Causes".
1) Charismatic "Terrorism" Leaders
2) Idealistic religious leaders
In addition, you can not simply kill them, as they will become martyrs and spawn more.
Templar Knight
10-12-2005, 21:45
I suppose you could always ignore them.... totaly
King Ragnar
10-12-2005, 22:01
Pull out of countries were they are coming from. *cough Iraq cough*
Papewaio
10-12-2005, 22:21
Or they could be a tool of the state like in Indonesia during Suharto's expansion into territory.
====
Wipe out the terrorists themselves and the ones financing them are equal to if not worse. The ones financing the terrorists are in the equivalent teir to the leaders. Do not allow incitement of violence to be seen as okay.
On the other side of the issue is removing the poverty, lack of secular education etc for the people as a mass. Remove the recruiting pool and the things that incite the people.
Support better press. Look at what is available and support the top 20% of the media. Apply pressure to governments that are attacking these media outlets.
1) Poor education (i.e. London bombers) Compared to most westerners they aren't that mature or that well educated.
2) Poor economic conditions (i.e. London Bombers) See above.
3) Israeli occupation of Palestine (i.e. attacks after withdrawals)
Considering the actions of those being withdrawn I don't expect either sides wounds to instantly heal.
Alexanderofmacedon
10-12-2005, 22:28
In addition, you can not simply kill them, as they will become martyrs and spawn more.
Yes...
Pull out of countries were they are coming from. *cough Iraq cough*
Again...yes...
Strike For The South
10-12-2005, 22:31
See Below
Strike For The South
10-12-2005, 22:31
Pull out of countries were they are coming from. *cough Iraq cough*
Yes and let a civil war break out cuasing more trouble than we already have
Alexanderofmacedon
10-12-2005, 22:51
cuasing more trouble than we already have created
You mean causing more trouble than we already have created...
Strike For The South
10-12-2005, 22:59
We cant leave now. The results would be much worse than what we have now
Adrian II
10-12-2005, 23:08
None these appear to address the "Root Causes".I believe there are no root causes, Kiwitt; only opportunities. Modern islamic terrorism is the product of ideology and circumstance.
Most movements were created by state actors (Pakistan, Saudi Arabia and the U.S. created the Afghan brigades, Iran created Hezbollah, etcetera) and then developed their own dynamic, thanks to charismatic leaders, able organizers and outside financing. Their recruits come from military conflict zones and peaceful nations alike; what they have in common is a sense of hurt pride, a notion that their core values and self-respect are threatened by western political, cultural, economic and military influences.
In the broadest possible sense, they react aversely to the modernisation of the world as they know it. Their ideology is reactionary: they want to return to a mythical Golden Age of Islam. In a sense they do not even acknowledge the linear progress of time. Al-Zawahiri for instance, the chief ideologist of Al Qaida, regards his struggle for the 'liberation' of the Holy Places as a mere repitition of the struggle for the liberation of Bagdad from the Mongols after 1258. The main inspiration of the Salafist movement is Imam Ibn Taymiyya (1263-1328 AD) who led that struggle from Cairo and preached Salafism to all sorts of heretics. Salafism (from Ar. salaf: 'predecessors', 'earlier generations') want to reintroduce the pure Islam of the first three generations after Mohamed.
In order to defeat them decisively, we must enable muslim societies to evolve and modernise in ways that leave no room for the jihadist mentality and movements to flourish and feed on peoples' misery and backwardness. The establishment of a large, politically independent middle class in muslim countries would be a major victory.
That is a tall order, but it must be met. We are either in this for the long haul, or we stand no chance whatsoever to defeat them.
Gawain of Orkeny
10-12-2005, 23:09
1) Poor education (i.e. London bombers) Compared to most westerners they aren't that mature or that well educated.
2) Poor economic conditions (i.e. London Bombers) See above.
And the terrrists on 911? They were both well educated and well to do.
Papewaio
10-12-2005, 23:57
Don Corleone can paste my PM response to him for you Gawain and others.
It ties in with what I am about to say anyhow:
Most movements were created by state actors (Pakistan, Saudi Arabia and the U.S. created the Afghan brigades, Iran created Hezbollah, etcetera) and then developed their own dynamic, thanks to charismatic leaders, able organizers and outside financing. Their recruits come from military conflict zones and peaceful nations alike; what they have in common is a sense of hurt pride, a notion that their core values and self-respect are threatened by western political, cultural, economic and military influences.
Which is a situation akin to that that created the Nazi brownshirts and exploited by the blackshirts. Taking a simplistic point of view that the brownshirts were stupid and manipulated by an elite upper echelon formed by the blackshirts.
We need more secular educated people. This will combat the brown shirt syndrome. As for the black shirts they need to be eliminated to a man.
Kaiser of Arabia
10-13-2005, 00:05
Ok here goes.
Step 1: Carpet Bombing
Step 2: Carpet Bombing
Step 3: Carpet Bombing
Step 4: Large Scale Invasion, destroying all risistance with Blitzkreig style tactics.
Step 5: Surround and Annahilate resistance in enemy strongholds like Fallujah or Baghdad (pre-capture, that is).
Step 6: Occupation and Martial Law
Step 7: Hunt and Destroy all known Terrorists, no mercy.
Step 8: If at this point the war is turning into a Vietnam-style Quagmire, use any and all means nessissary to win, whether it be more Carpet Bombings (you could tell I love Carpet Bombings, can't you?) to Napalm to Chemicals if nessissary. The overall victory is more important than any amount of Human lives.
Step 9: Rebuilding. Spend money to rebuild the infrastructure and set up a positive, pro-American government. Have them recruit men to help the US soldiers.
Step 10: When the nation has a strong enough military to help take care of itself, withdrawl.
Templar Knight
10-13-2005, 00:18
Infact I prefer Kaisers idea but with more carpet bombing ~:)
Papewaio
10-13-2005, 00:20
Would this have been an okay tactic to use on WWII Germany?
Should all the German Nazi members been killed post world war II?
Should all the German military members been rounded up and put in camps until we could determine if they were a Nazi?
Should we applied equity in the form of an eye for an eye and killed one German for every person that died in deathcamps?
If you think that is fair, then I can agree with your post Kaiser.
We need more secular educated people.I think you can nix secular- we just need more educated people. Really, I think they need self-determination more than anything else. When faced with oppressive governments, massive unemployment and total disenfranchisement people are left vulnerable to kook ideologies and extremism.
Papewaio
10-13-2005, 00:30
The Taliban were very much into teaching. Teaching a fundamentalist viewpoint.
The Bali bombers went to a fundamentalist school.
The terrorists in Thailand have been linked with fundamentalist schools.
There is quite a strong connection between terrorism and a fundamentalist schooling.
I agree that it is the vacuum left over that allows the teaching of these extremist view points... same thing happened in Palestine with the occupation, no real education so Hezbollah and co have co-opted the school system into their recruitment drive.
Hmmm given the London Bombings maybe we should just kill all teachers with carpet bombings eh Kaiser?
Kaiser of Arabia
10-13-2005, 00:32
Would this have been an okay tactic to use on WWII Germany?
Should all the German Nazi members been killed post world war II?
Should all the German military members been rounded up and put in camps until we could determine if they were a Nazi?
Should we applied equity in the form of an eye for an eye and killed one German for every person that died in deathcamps?
If you think that is fair, then I can agree with your post Kaiser.
Justification is in the eye of the beholder. It is within a nations right to do whatever needed for it's national security, but it is also within another nation's right to react if their national security is threatened by said nation's actions. It is a viscious cycle, but it is true. And unfortunatly we must work with it. Noting in life is fair, if it was I wouldn't be living where I do, I'd be alot better off. But alas, since life isn't fair, many solutions to life's problems will not be fair. War is not about fairness, it is about victory. And securing that victory by all means nessissary.
Would this have been an okay tactic to use on WWII Germany?
Didn't we?
Should all the German Nazi members been killed post world war II?
We did, well, most of whom we caught.
Should all the German military members been rounded up and put in camps until we could determine if they were a Nazi?
Sounds like what happened.
Should we applied equity in the form of an eye for an eye and killed one German for every person that died in deathcamps?
Soviets did that, just about.
Papewaio
10-13-2005, 00:37
Of course nothing in life is fair unless we make it so. Taking the point of view that things are not fair so we should continue to do so leads to doctors who torture patients, teachers that pick on the kids at the bottom of the class, police that assualt people becuase the police have a badge, politicians that pork barrel and take kick backs etc.
Since the situation is already bad why not pour on a little more petrol on the bonfire...
The Taliban were very much into teaching. Teaching a fundamentalist viewpoint.
The Bali bombers went to a fundamentalist school.
The terrorists in Thailand have been linked with fundamentalist schools.
There is quite a strong connection between terrorism and a fundamentalist schooling.There's a difference between education and brainwashing. I seriously doubt they were taught much in the way of math or any critical thinking skills. Much of what you see(which may be skewed, I admit) in fundamentalist madrasas is rocking back and forth while repeating religious verses until memorized rote. That's not really an education.
Kaiser of Arabia
10-13-2005, 00:39
Of course nothing in life is fair unless we make it so. Taking the point of view that things are not fair so we should continue to do so leads to doctors who torture patients, teachers that pick on the kids at the bottom of the class, police that assualt people becuase the police have a badge, politicians that pork barrel and take kick backs etc.
Since the situation is already bad why not pour on a little more petrol on the bonfire...
We tried fairness with these people. It didn't work. We need to show them the might of America, and what happens to those that threaten our nation.
Tribesman
10-13-2005, 00:53
Step 1: Carpet Bombing
Step 2: Carpet Bombing
Step 3: Carpet Bombing
Thats a lot of carpets , I must invest in a carpet manufacturing enterprise .
Didn't we?
No .
Sounds like what happened.
No it doesn't .
We did, well, most of whom we caught.
No , they did it to a small percentage of those who were convicted of war crimes .
Most Nazi Party members were unaffected apart from the fact that they didn't have a party anymore .
Soviets did that, just about.
No they didn't .
We need to show them the might of America, and what happens to those that threaten our nation.
Well that isn't working very well is it ?
While I am reading these comments, assuming the Western World is the Roman Empire, headed by the US as Rome, what happened to Rome as they tried to increase their military tactics to deal with the Babarian menace. Rome even incorporated these babarians into the whole empire. Did it work ?
Given the speed of transport/communications, etc. today, the timescales will be reduced significantly, can we visualise parallels with today's situation. i.e. increase the military response, increase the resistance, increase the chaos, leading eventually to collapse.
This situation needs a different response, then just "Military" to work.
Strike For The South
10-13-2005, 00:59
Ok here goes.
Step 1: Carpet Bombing
Step 2: Carpet Bombing
Step 3: Carpet Bombing
Step 4: Large Scale Invasion, destroying all risistance with Blitzkreig style tactics.
Step 5: Surround and Annahilate resistance in enemy strongholds like Fallujah or Baghdad (pre-capture, that is).
Step 6: Occupation and Martial Law
Step 7: Hunt and Destroy all known Terrorists, no mercy.
Step 8: If at this point the war is turning into a Vietnam-style Quagmire, use any and all means nessissary to win, whether it be more Carpet Bombings (you could tell I love Carpet Bombings, can't you?) to Napalm to Chemicals if nessissary. The overall victory is more important than any amount of Human lives.
Step 9: Rebuilding. Spend money to rebuild the infrastructure and set up a positive, pro-American government. Have them recruit men to help the US soldiers.
Step 10: When the nation has a strong enough military to help take care of itself, withdrawl.
That is wrong on so many levels:furious3:
Kaiser of Arabia
10-13-2005, 01:10
Step 1: Carpet Bombing
Step 2: Carpet Bombing
Step 3: Carpet Bombing
Thats a lot of carpets , I must invest in a carpet manufacturing enterprise .
We need to show them the might of America, and what happens to those that threaten our nation.
Well that isn't working very well is it ?
Since this isn't a place to discuss WWII Germany, i'll just refer to these two points.
1. Yes, you may want to. Though they will be bombed. ~:)
2. We haven't been trying, we've been trying the liberal happy "lets be nice, they'll be nice back" approach rather than just releasing the Corps (and yes, I mean the US MARINE CORPS) on 'em with the sole intent of as much collateral as possible. After enough people have died, or enough familes torn apart, I think the terrorists will get the point.
Strike For The South
10-13-2005, 01:14
agh yes and piss off more and more. Then after we do that we can look back and see 10$ gas prices 250,000 dead americans a ruined economy and our nation destroyed. Im all for killing people but this goes over the top
AntiochusIII
10-13-2005, 01:17
Kaiser, I know it's just the internet rambling "phenomenon" but I find your value of life very...disturbing.
It, by the way, is very Stalinist.
And bombing carpets won't help. Persia was a major producer of carpets already. They won't be surprised.
Im all for killing people butHmm... It can be interpreted either way. And I got to practice my selective quoting skills, useful in debates, real or false. ;)
Papewaio
10-13-2005, 01:32
And bombing carpets won't help. Persia was a major producer of carpets already. They won't be surprised.
ROFL,
It would finally give crediability to all these ads:"MASSIVE CARPET SALES AS WE HAVE BEEN LIQUIDATED, BURNT DOWN AND THIS IS THE NEXT TO LAST SALE this season.
Kaiser of Arabia
10-13-2005, 01:56
agh yes and piss off more and more. Then after we do that we can look back and see 10$ gas prices 250,000 dead americans a ruined economy and our nation destroyed. Im all for killing people but this goes over the top
How does it go over the top? The massive bombings ensures minimal resistance, and the total war strategies ensure a quick victory. Brutal tactics will reduce resistance and insurgancy. And then we can take their gas.
It, by the way, is very Stalinist.
https://img402.imageshack.us/img402/6963/flag0cu.gif
~D ~D ~D ~D ~D ~D
Tactics that appear not to be working in a number of countries.
1) Attacking "suspect" countries/leaders
2) Increasing security measures
3) Setting threat levels
4) Restricting immigration
It has been proven that these following items are not the causes.
1) Poor education (i.e. London bombers)
2) Poor economic conditions (i.e. London Bombers)
3) Israeli occupation of Palestine (i.e. attacks after withdrawals)
None these appear to address the "Root Causes".
1) Charismatic "Terrorism" Leaders
2) Idealistic religious leaders
In addition, you can not simply kill them, as they will become martyrs and spawn more. Give it Time. Thousands, if not hundreds of years.
Adrian II
10-13-2005, 08:23
I agree that it is the vacuum left over that allows the teaching of these extremist view points... Exactly, and one can not bomb a vacuum. In fact bombs often create more vacuum.
The Saudi-financed madrassa's of the Taliban and the Pakistani Jama'at for instance have only thrived since the 1980's, when the structural reform programmes of the IMF and World Bank forced countries to cut back on public education. The health clinics of the Hamas, the Lebanese Hezbollah or the Brotherhood in Egypt are only succesful because the corrupt local governments leave a vacuum in health care. Etcetera etcetera.
I believe the biggest hub we face is that the necessary democratic and economic reforms have to come from the people themselves, from the inside as it were; not from the West, because western meddling would backfire. It would backfire primarily because the corrupt local governments, once they are threatened by such reforms, would divert popular anger by turning it against the West in much the same way as they blame Israel for most of the present woes of their countries.
The true vacuum in all of this is ideological; there is no rival ideology for jihadism. Jihadism's true force on the ground is that it creates bonds of solidarity, mutual help and shared ideals among people. Ideally that vacuum should be filled by democratic socialism, but neither democracy nor socialism had any chance to take root in most of the muslim world because countries and regions were being torn apart for so long by the Cold War. Israel managed to turn a desert into an oasis under decades of sustained socialist rule. Just thinking of what might have been possible in the wider region under similar circumstances makes my heart ache. Oh, of all the missed opportunities...
Franconicus
10-13-2005, 08:49
Ok here goes.
Step 1: Carpet Bombing
Step 2: Carpet Bombing
Step 3: Carpet Bombing
Step 4: Large Scale Invasion, destroying all risistance with Blitzkreig style tactics.
Step 5: Surround and Annahilate resistance in enemy strongholds like Fallujah or Baghdad (pre-capture, that is).
Step 6: Occupation and Martial Law
Step 7: Hunt and Destroy all known Terrorists, no mercy.
Step 8: If at this point the war is turning into a Vietnam-style Quagmire, use any and all means nessissary to win, whether it be more Carpet Bombings (you could tell I love Carpet Bombings, can't you?) to Napalm to Chemicals if nessissary. The overall victory is more important than any amount of Human lives.
Step 9: Rebuilding. Spend money to rebuild the infrastructure and set up a positive, pro-American government. Have them recruit men to help the US soldiers.
Step 10: When the nation has a strong enough military to help take care of itself, withdrawl.
:wall: :wall: :wall: :stars: :smash: Kaiser, I think you did not understand the goal. It is not how to recruit more terrorists but how to end terror.
Wer mit Ungeheuern kämpft, mag zusehn, dass er nicht dabei zum Ungeheuer wird.:pumpkin:
Franconicus
10-13-2005, 09:11
No he isn't. His proposal just demonstrates that the military option failed and that any increase of military actions will lead to a complete desaster.
So what can be done:
1. Every nation has to work on the integration of the foreign people living there. Germany, for example, has a lot to do.
2. Extremistic preachers in our countries have to be controlled and if necessary arrested. There must be pressure on governments like Sudan to control their pereachers too.
3. We have to make sure that all refugee camps disappear. They are a big pool for recruitment. The people in palestina must have a economic chance.
4. Propaganda; why aren't there douzends of broadcast stations to send the message of peace into every muslim country?
5. While the US is busy fighting in Iraq the EU should start and lead the war against terror.
Adrian II
10-13-2005, 09:59
Carpet bombing (..) destroy (..) napalm (..) overall victory (..) Blah dee blah.. We all know you are being funny again, Kaiser of Arabia, but you must be outgrowing that stage by now. And you must have some serious ideas about how to defeat terrorism as well.
Care to share them? :bow:
Tribesman
10-13-2005, 10:07
After enough people have died, or enough familes torn apart, I think the terrorists will get the point.
Nope , it will be totally counter productive and ensure that all your "allies" desert you .
The massive bombings ensures minimal resistance,
Look at korea , Vietnam or Cambodia for examples where it has failed .
and the total war strategies ensure a quick victory.
No they don't , the German invasion of Russia being a prime example , or the Russian response , neither bought a quick victory and both were ruinously expensive both in terms of lives lost and money wasted.
Brutal tactics will reduce resistance and insurgancy.
Brutal tactics increase resistance and insurgency , too many examples to choose from , so I leave it to you to pick a conflict that would back up your "ideas" .
And then we can take their gas.
~D ~D ~D After you have taken decades to put out the fires , rebuild the basic infrastucture , rebuild the oil infrastructure and finally restart production , by which time you will be so bankrupt that you could not afford to ship the stuff anyway .
Since this isn't a place to discuss WWII Germany
Hey WWII Germany was introduced to this topic by a moderator so it is OK to discusss it .....so ...No ....No it doesn't .....No ...No they didn't ....
feel free to try and refute any of those statements that I made in reply to your claims , you might have a little difficulty in doing it though as they are true ~:cheers:
No he isn't. His proposal just demonstrates that the military option failed and that any increase of military actions will lead to a complete desaster.
So what can be done:
1. Every nation has to work on the integration of the foreign people living there. Germany, for example, has a lot to do.
2. Extremistic preachers in our countries have to be controlled and if necessary arrested. There must be pressure on governments like Sudan to control their pereachers too.
3. We have to make sure that all refugee camps disappear. They are a big pool for recruitment. The people in palestina must have a economic chance.
4. Propaganda; why aren't there douzends of broadcast stations to send the message of peace into every muslim country?
5. While the US is busy fighting in Iraq the EU should start and lead the war against terror. The EU is powerless my friend... Why? It is all about conflict of interests.
There are many out there that want an EU super-power, something opposing USA or at least are as powerful as USA … to achieve a power balance.
To become a superpower one need to have common security interests. There are no such common interests in Europe.
Some of the most fundamental conflicts of interests in the world go across Europe.
Usually this is about markets, but first and foremost it is about oil and gas.
No modern state can even imagine security without energy or energy supply. One of the reasons that USA has such a strong position today is because they were self-supporting through most of the last century. This has changed and they are today very dependant on outside resources. This is one of the strong cards that the terrorists play. To “hurt” USA they only need to “up” the petroleum price.
Just by looking at energy reserves and energy supply in Europe, you can clearly see the conflict of interests.
Most of the Mediterranean nations get their energy supply from North Africa and the Middle East as is true with USA. If USA’s energy supply is secure, their supply is also secure. That is why they were so lenient in the Iraq conflict.
France get only a fraction of their energy supply from the Middle East, so their security was not threatened as can be said about Germany.
Norway delivers 1/3 of the gas that Germany consumes and I guess Russia delivers the rest. Russia is in possession of 30 percent of the world gas reserves.
You can basically go through Europe, country by country and see where their interests lie based on their energy supply.
The EU can not become a super-power because at the end of the day every nation must first think of their own security. And since the nations of Europe do not have common interests and security, they can not act as one.
The one thing USA could do that would really hurt terrorism would be to stop using oil as an energy resource. It would hurt the rest of us too, but the terrorist would loose their funding.
Kagemusha
10-13-2005, 10:42
I think that only real answer is patience and money.If we really want win a war against "Terrorism",first we have to decide is who is a terrorist and who isnt.For example the Zhecheens in Russia have a legimite reason to fight against Russia, because the Russia has invaded them in order to secure their Oil fields and to remain powerfull in the Caucasus area.But legimicy shouldnt allow terrorist actions like the attack on school in Besslan.The planner of the attack Shamil Basaiev has proved connections to Al-Qaida and other Islamic terrorist networks.But is he in FBI´s most wanted list?No.Infact little time a go he was intervieved in US television.
If we want to have global war against terrorism we should first condem all attacks on pure civilian targets.After that those who attack civilian targets should be all considered war criminals no matter what their political believes are.And to those who are considered terrorist war criminals should be considered only one sentence:Death when catched.
The asset that the western world has the most is money.We should start bribing people in all ower the world as agents,not just in our own countries.And whenever some of those agents provide us information about the Terrorist we should hit them immediately with all means necessary not just monitor them in case they actually do something.So i suggest terror campaign against terrorist.
Make them fear is.And in the long run the ordinary people in those countries will be fed up of continuos attacks from west to their countries and eliminate the terrorist them selves.But this strategy will take time and the terrorist will attack against us too and civilians will die.No matter what we do.
Only counter for their hate is fear, make sure they fear you more then they hate you. It is rediculous that we should even consider them a threat.
Adrian II
10-13-2005, 12:13
Only counter for their hate is fear, make sure they fear you more then they hate you. It is rediculous that we should even consider them a threat.How would you instill fear in people who fear their God more than anything else and who sacrifice themselves relatively easily in suicide attacks and armed conflicts?
Adrian II
10-13-2005, 12:18
So i suggest terror campaign against terrorist.That is what the Israelis and Russians have been doing for a long time. It is a failed strategy, based on mistaken assumptions about islamic terrorists, their ideology, their modus operandi and their method of recruitment.
How would you instill fear in people who fear their God more than anything else and who sacrifice themselves relatively easily in suicide attacks and armed conflicts?
By letting them understand they sacrifice a whole lot more; they started this party, let's play by their rules. Call it shock and awful.
Adrian II
10-13-2005, 12:53
To become a superpower one need to have common security interests. There are no such common interests in Europe. Some of the most fundamental conflicts of interests in the world go across Europe. Usually this is about markets, but first and foremost it is about oil and gas.The European nations, the United States and other democracies around the world share certain values and interests. That is where the emphasis should lie. They would certainly leave their diverging interests aside and unite in the face of a grave danger such as the former Soviet Union. Modern islamic terrorism is not nearly as dangerous. Therefore democracies grant each other a lot of latitude in formulating their own strategies against it. The notion that Europe should become a rival superpower to the United States is silly. I do not think that is what Franconicus advocated anyway.
It has been proven that these following items are not the causes.
3) Israeli occupation of Palestine (i.e. attacks after withdrawals)
Israel still very far from withdrawals to Green Line, and have no intention to do.
That they abandon Gaza is just common sense replacing religious idealism.
I claim treatment of Palestinians by Israel and the very big lap dog they have USA is one main cause of anger from moslem world.
Israel still very far from withdrawals to Green Line, and have no intention to do.
That they abandon Gaza is just common sense replacing religious idealism.
I claim treatment of Palestinians by Israel and the very big lap dog they have USA is one main cause of anger from moslem world.
Palestina is just an excuse, it should be solved but then they will find a new reason to cut of heads. It is completely normal that radical muslims feel victimised, they always do. There is no need to do anything to soften them up, it will be seen as weakness anyway so why bother. It isn't a rational thing that we are trying to combat, these are completely insane people with countless fans within our own borders. They will hate us anyway, let's live up to their expectations I say.
Adrian II
10-13-2005, 13:32
By letting them understand they sacrifice a whole lot more (..) Call it shock and awful.Call it whatever you like, it will not frighten them and it will bring them yet more recruits.
Call it whatever you like, it will not frighten them and it will bring them yet more recruits.
So? That does not matter at all, they will run out of recruits eventualy. I am perfectly fine with the enlightment proces that is currently happening within the muslim world, and I am fully aware that terrorism is the proof that this is happening, but have your own damn history and don't bother us.
Adrian II
10-13-2005, 13:52
So? That does not matter at all, they will run out of recruits eventually.How? What exactly should be done to make them run out of recruits? I mean let us have some suggestions, otherwise people will think that all you do is talk, Fragony. And we don't want that, do we? :mellow:
How? What exactly should be done to make them run out of recruits? I mean let us have some suggestions, otherwise people will think that all you do is talk, Fragony. And we don't want that, do we? :mellow:
You do ~;) But it is very simple to let them run out of recruits, point and shoot. And talking is all I am allowed to do mia muca, you know as well as me that just thinking about torching a mosk will get you 4 years in prison in dutchiestan.
Tribesman
10-13-2005, 14:14
you know as well as me that just thinking about torching a mosk will get you 4 years in prison in dutchiestan.
Oh that old case again .
So by "thinking" you mean plotting , assembling devices and getting caught red handed and punished for your crimes in accordance with the law :laugh4:
Franconicus
10-13-2005, 14:22
The EU is powerless my friend... Why? It is all about conflict of interests.
Sigurd, my friend, what are you talking about? The EU is not powerless at all. If you reduce power to pure military strength, you are right, but power is much more than that. EU in has a big economy and has excellent relationships to many other nations. The clue is that the European policy is not dominated by military. Europe is not threatening any other nation. So we can support, arbitrate ... . When we really need an operation somewhere we will be forced to cooperate with local countries. It will be much easier for us then for the US.
Leading the fight against terror does not mean that the Eu should do it without or against the US. I'd rather do it with the US. But they are simply not in the state (or mood) for an effective fight. Does that mean that Europe should sit and wait?
The dependency on oil is clear. So what. Most of the oil selling countries have a vital interest to stop terror. Maybe they do not have an interest that most of them are occupied by US troops and that their oil business is run by US companies. So I guess they will be happy to cooperate with the EU.
All we have to do is coordinate our intelligence and police and diplomacy.
Adrian II
10-13-2005, 15:19
You do ~;) But it is very simple to let them run out of recruits, point and shoot.Shoot whom exactly?
And talking is all I am allowed to do mia muca, you know as well as me that just thinking about torching a mosk will get you 4 years in prison in dutchiestan.Five youngsters who set a mosque and an islamic school on fire in the town of Uden were sentenced to 180 hours of community service. An adult who tried to set fire to the Mevlana mosque in Rotterdam got eight months in prison.
And on May 9 the ringleader of the group that set fire to the Venray mosque was sentenced to half the time you mentioned: three years, of which one year probational. The reason for that being that his explicit intention was to cause terror in the entire muslim community in The Netherlands. That is terrorism. We don't like terrorists.
If you think islamic terrorism can be defeated by such means, you too will end up in prison, dear Frag. The food is bad, you have only 52 tv channels that all show the same programme and there is no archery range available for you. You know I love you; I would visit you behind your bars, make a sensitive, in-depth quality interview with you and twist your words in the final version to make you look like a complete imbecile.
In other words: you better start thinking now. ~:cool:
Geoffrey S
10-13-2005, 16:48
Countries in the Middle-East need time and room to develop, which is simply not being given right now. No intervention in their politics should be used; let's face it, most of the more vehement opponents of the West are there because of us in the first place. We cannot impose a stable solution to problems in the Middle-East, such a thing can only be achieved by the countries themselves. Outside intervention tends to be resented and very temporary.
Kagemusha
10-13-2005, 18:08
Adrian II mate.If you think that we cant win the terrorist by force and money.Then i would like to hear your suggestion how to beat them?:bow:
Kaiser of Arabia
10-13-2005, 18:27
No he isn't. His proposal just demonstrates that the military option failed and that any increase of military actions will lead to a complete desaster.
So what can be done:
1. Every nation has to work on the integration of the foreign people living there. Germany, for example, has a lot to do.
2. Extremistic preachers in our countries have to be controlled and if necessary arrested. There must be pressure on governments like Sudan to control their pereachers too.
3. We have to make sure that all refugee camps disappear. They are a big pool for recruitment. The people in palestina must have a economic chance.
4. Propaganda; why aren't there douzends of broadcast stations to send the message of peace into every muslim country?
5. While the US is busy fighting in Iraq the EU should start and lead the war against terror.
1. Yes, I agree. I was speaking from a strictly military perspective of how to win a war against a terrorist nation.
2. I agree, mostly. I think they should be imprisoned for inciting violence and rebellion.
3. Meh, it's an ok idea. But I don't agree with how I think you're saying we need to do it. By giving the Palistinians an "economic chance," what exactly do you mean? Do you mean their own nation? Then no. If not, then it may work.
4. Yes, we need tons of propaganda! And we need to destroy anti-US/Coalition propaganda like Al Jazeerah (or whateverit'sspelled).
5. Never happen, the EU hates America more than it hates Terrorism it seems. At least with Merkel Germany may have a chance, but France, Spain, etc. will never stand behind us.
Adrian II
10-13-2005, 20:09
Adrian II mate.If you think that we cant win the terrorist by force and money.Then i would like to hear your suggestion how to beat them?:bow:Read the thread. They will never be defeated unless the political conditions in which they flourish are changed. There is no shortcut. I do not understand why people refuse to accept that. Malaria, racism or the Soviet Union were not defeated in a fortnight, so why would islamic terrorism?
Tribesman
10-13-2005, 22:54
Yes, we need tons of propaganda! And we need to destroy anti-US/Coalition propaganda like Al Jazeerah
So I suppose you support the nutters that are sending death threats to the ex-USMC officer who has been given a job by that media outlet to present an American perspective on the news ?
It does seem that perhaps you may have been swallowing a little too much propoganda yourself .:embarassed:
Kaiser of Arabia
10-13-2005, 23:00
Yes, we need tons of propaganda! And we need to destroy anti-US/Coalition propaganda like Al Jazeerah
So I suppose you support the nutters that are sending death threats to the ex-USMC officer who has been given a job by that media outlet to present an American perspective on the news ?
It does seem that perhaps you may have been swallowing a little too much propoganda yourself .:embarassed:
Al-Jazeerah is evil! EVIL EVIL EVIL!
Plus they're broadcasts are low quality crap.
Tribesman
10-13-2005, 23:06
Perhaps I should amend my last post to .
It does seem that you have definately been swallowing too much propoganda .
Al-Jazeerah is evil! EVIL EVIL EVIL!
Plus they're broadcasts are low quality crap.
I’m desperately trying to figure out if you’re being serious or not. :dizzy:
Leet Eriksson
10-13-2005, 23:22
2 words:
Give the people Pepsi, Cake/Bread and TV.
Rinse and Repeat. It works in the peninsula! why not the rest of the arab world? ~D
Papewaio
10-13-2005, 23:36
I think the best method is to listen deeply to Kaiser and then do the direct opposite...
Franconicus
10-14-2005, 08:51
1. Yes, I agree. I was speaking from a strictly military perspective of how to win a war against a terrorist nation.
2. I agree, mostly. I think they should be imprisoned for inciting violence and rebellion.
3. Meh, it's an ok idea. But I don't agree with how I think you're saying we need to do it. By giving the Palistinians an "economic chance," what exactly do you mean? Do you mean their own nation? Then no. If not, then it may work.
4. Yes, we need tons of propaganda! And we need to destroy anti-US/Coalition propaganda like Al Jazeerah (or whateverit'sspelled).
5. Never happen, the EU hates America more than it hates Terrorism it seems. At least with Merkel Germany may have a chance, but France, Spain, etc. will never stand behind us.
Dear Kaiser,
1. I know you only talk about military perspectives. To me this is one of the main problems of many Americans. If there is a problem they can only think of military solutions. By the way, the so called 'war against terror' is not against a terrorist nation. It is against a terror organisation that is supranational.
3. If you keep people for generation in camps, if their houses and offices are bombed from time to time - what do you expect their children to do when they grow up?
4. I know that AJ does anti American prop. But frankly spoken, usually what they say is true, though only a part of the trueth. Just the part that the US military does not want to hear. If you want a free society in Iraq, you must accept AJ.
5. This is not a war US against Europe. It is all Bush's fault that we do not fight side by side. EU does not hate the US. It is just a shame that the US is not willing to fight terror. So why should the EU not start to do it all by herself?
Kagemusha
10-14-2005, 20:44
Read the thread. They will never be defeated unless the political conditions in which they flourish are changed. There is no shortcut. I do not understand why people refuse to accept that. Malaria, racism or the Soviet Union were not defeated in a fortnight, so why would islamic terrorism?
I did read the thread.Just how are you going to chance the political conditions in those countries?Ever heard of internal affairs?You can say that the things i suggested doesnt work but you should really provide something congrete.Ofcorse we should also stop the hunger in the world and the climate chance but i ask you how?And if you would be kind enough to provide the part in my repply where i was talking about shortcuts,what i stated was that this going to take long time and many will suffer before its over if its over ever?What i was calling out was an united front against terrorism but im sure that both you and i know that it would be against many nations national intrests.And its unlike to happen.
Adrian II
10-14-2005, 21:55
Of course we should also stop the hunger in the world and the climate chance but i ask you how?Islamic terrorism has no correlation whatsoever with poverty or climate change. The only recipe I believe in is social and political change from within, and such changes are very difficult to support from the outside without creating largely adverse effects. Outside support in accordance with the prevalent neoliberal consensus for instance is useless, because it would not enhance peoples' control over their own destiny or the destiny of their country. Good social services, health care and public education are needed most of all. Direct investment is needed as well. A major problem of the muslim world is that it does not benefit from the global flow of capital. National capital leaves their countries in the form of overseas investment and bond-purchases, but there is almost no reverse flow of money into their countries. The entire Middle East for instance draws only 1% of worldwide direct investment.
Ever heard of internal affairs?No need to be condescending. By shortcuts I mean sanctions, bombing campaigns and other direct interventions that constitute serious meddling in the internal affairs of countries. There are more subtle ways to approach islamic countries. The EU's approchement with Turkey would be a prime example.
AntiochusIII
10-14-2005, 23:24
2 words:
Give the people Pepsi, Cake/Bread and TV.
Rinse and Repeat. It works in the peninsula! why not the rest of the arab world? ~DYes. Bread and Circus does wonders to the masses.
But to modernize it I say Mcdonald and Junk American Reality Shows.
Within a generation the entire Middle East will be dulled into a harmless corporate-slave pig of a people. Victory. :)
But here, food for thought. Mac's.
WHENEVER those states which have been acquired as stated have been accustomed to live under their own laws and in freedom, there are three courses for those who wish to hold them: the first is to ruin them, we did leave Iraq one of the most unstabilized places in the world, didn't we? the next is to reside there in person gah, coalition forces, gah, the third is to permit them to live under their own laws, drawing a tribute, and establishing within it an oligarchy which will keep it friendly to you. something, I say, the US is trying to accomplish. It, IMO, is their only hope for a triumphant pullout. Because such a government, being created by the prince, knows that it cannot stand without his friendship and interest, and does its utmost to support him; and therefore he who would keep a city accustomed to freedom will hold it more easily by the means of its own citizens than in any other way. Bread and circus ("propaganda"), until the masses must depend on it ;)
Just replace cities with countries. Humans are, after all, all the same. They share basic natural rights, and basic natural instincts. We aren't that far from monkeys.
The only recipe I believe in is social and political change from within
That is already happening, hence the terrorism. You know Gilles Kepel? He has written a good book about it 'Jihad, trail of political islam'. It is a bit thick, so it is perfect if you just cannot reach the cookies.
Adrian II
10-16-2005, 13:02
That is already happening, hence the terrorism. You know Gilles Kepel? He has written a good book about it 'Jihad, trail of political islam'. It is a bit thick, so it is perfect if you just cannot reach the cookies.I have read it, and I have just read his new book Fitna as well. It analyses, among other things, the interesting symbiosis between Neoconservatism and islamic jihadism. I believe you and I agree that the modernisation of the islamic world is the real catalyst of various unpleasant developments. We differ in the sense that shooting everyone in sight is not my preferred solution to them.
I believe you and I agree that the modernisation of the islamic world is the real catalyst of various unpleasant developments.
Aye we agree on that, it is the slow and painfull process of enlightment, the jihad is probably just as welcome in the muslim world as the inquisition was over here, but the thing is: 'why should we care about all that'. Terrorists don't give a shit about the western world, and that is why they should be stopped with any means possible because I don't really feel like pr-meat today. It is not our problem so they shouldn't have made it one, but they did. Really, what would you do? I am sure there is an award that Ali B didn't get allready and if that fails we can always make him a knight in the order of the house of orange but after that? How would you win them over? You can't mia muca, and they will hate you even more for trying. Why make it so difficult, they want to die anyway so that they can respect their 70 virgins, I like the USA approach myselve, create a battlefield and let them come to you.
Adrian II
10-16-2005, 21:08
(..) the thing is: 'why should we care about all that'.Because the development of decent, democratic societies around the world is in our interest.
(..) I like the USA approach myself, create a battlefield and let them come to you.I think it is a bad idea to create more Talibanism.
Kaiser of Arabia
10-16-2005, 21:19
I’m desperately trying to figure out if you’re being serious or not. :dizzy:
Semi-serious. :dizzy2:
Papewaio
10-17-2005, 02:48
Islamic terrorism has no correlation whatsoever with poverty or climate change.
Isn't most of this about the key components of poverty or the worst aspects of poverty:
Good social services, health care and public education are needed most of all. Direct investment is needed as well. A major problem of the muslim world is that it does not benefit from the global flow of capital. National capital leaves their countries in the form of overseas investment and bond-purchases, but there is almost no reverse flow of money into their countries. The entire Middle East for instance draws only 1% of worldwide direct investment.
I think the ability to get massive wealth (oil) without having to invest in people (a growing middle class) means that the ME nations can be massively wealthy without the need to grow a well educated working middle class.
Meneldil
10-17-2005, 17:19
Quite frankly, I doubt there's a way to defeat islamist fanatics, apart from granting a decent economic and education level to all Muslim countries or to simply eradicate islam as a religion/way of thinking.
As neither one of these goals is achievable, and since terrorists could hardly find a way to destroy the western society, I'm hoping that radical islam will fall appart and slowly vanish, just as communism more or less did a few decades ago.
vBulletin® v3.7.1, Copyright ©2000-2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.