Questions for those Opposing the US' strategy in the War on Terror

You win over guerilla and terrorist by destroing thier farms blockading them and waiting untill they get out of the forrest becouse of hunger then you shoot them dead. In a war against guerilla and terrorist you can't use "political correct" warfare.

I'm not saying that this is right, only that you need to do it to win. I don't think i would support such a strategy.

Moving on to times when terrorists / guerillas are inside cities where the local population doesn't even know they are there. Surround the city and starve them out? I don't think that this would work. London is too important for that method.

fallen851, those Israli "victims" in fact were responsible for a terrorist campaign. American sympathies went a lot further than right / wrong.

~:smoking:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by sharrukin

Image over substance is the job of PR officers and it only goes so far. The worlds superpower trying to look like a 98lb weakling is only going to look ridiculous.

---

Nous sommes tous Americains.

How soon people forget.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Pannonian

Nous sommes tous Americains.

How soon people forget.

---

Yes, people do forget, and the goodwill you allude to was soon 'forgotten' as reality intruded. Nobody had any illusions that something terrible was going to happen to those who got in the way of the Americans, following 911.

Very soon afterwards you had nervous liberals cautioning the Americans not to take action. The pointless Iraq war burned up a lot of goodwill throughout the world as it was seen as having next to nothing to do with 911. Be that as it may, it was inevitable that American predominance in the world would rekindle resentment. Rooting for the underdog is entrenched in the modern world and for a brief spell the Americans were seen as just that. Given who they are and the power they wield, it could never be anything lasting.