Quote:
|
Originally posted by Skeks in the city And we'd have had more money and troops to use against REAL terrorist threats, like Iran, Pakistan and Afganistan.
|
The flaw in your reasoning is that as fast as we kill them, new ones are being born. Unless we do something to fundamentally change the middle east, we are doomed to an endless war against muslim terrorists. Using our troops against terrorists won't work in the long term if that is all we do. The only thing that will work is to secularize and democratize the middle east along with deconcentrating the wealth in that region. This is what we are doing in Iraq and it is the only hope for the war on terrorism.
Bullets and bombs won't work as a long term strategy. Liberty, secularization, women's rights, and a viable middle class will work (althougth this may take short term bullets and bombs to accomplish). I don't know if we can achieve that, but we have to at least try or we are doomed to more 9/11's.
It is so short sighted of you to focus on using bullets and bombs to kill terrorists. For each one we kill, 50 or more muslim women are giving birth to a newborn terrorists.
I know that Ty likes to chime in about how if we are doing this in Iraq, then we should then be doing this everywhere, but we don't have the resources to do it everywhere. We have no other choice than to do it one step at a time because we don't have the ability to do it any other way.
After 9/11, the middle east terrorist mills have to be shut down. But how? By bombing Saudi Arabia? Not as long as Hello and his buddies want cheap gas for their SUVs. Iraq was the only viable option. If we can start the process of democratization in Iraq, there is hope. We also have to reduce our demand for foreign oil so that our dependence on the middle eastern totalitarian regimes like SA won't interfere with the war on terrorism.
Threaded Mode