Can the War on Terror Be Won?

[Syndyre]

"Reduced to obscurity"? How? and Why?
The ideology being fought is a religious ideology, it can never be reduced to obscurity without the total elimination of that belief/faith. The harder one suppresses any form of faith, the more it will grow in the hearts and minds of people.
Groups like Baarder-Meinhof, Red Brigade, Black September etc, were defeated, and their ideology was defeated, because communism and the Soviet Union collapsed, their ideology was removed and shown to be unsuccessful , but how is a religious ideology to be shown as unsuccessful, or removed?
The second dillema that emerges on "TWAT" (The War Against Terror), is where does the line emerge between Terror and Freedom?
It seems that the word "terrorist" is being labeled or applied to any organisation or group that opposes the status quo, or the official party line.
Some group emerges to overthrow some corrupt or oppressive government, and the government in question labels that organisation "terrorist", immediately the group in question loses support and is seen in a bad light and end of freedom movement.
There are far too few regulations being applied to what is to be labelled as terrorism, and anti-terrorism laws are far to sweeping to be positive, they are going to be the downfall of freedom, the downfall of free speech and the downfall of any opposition to official policy in the future.
The war on terror, is the end of the freedom of opposition.

For how and why read the article. Its a religious-based ideology but its not pure religion, just motivated/inspired by it. If you're suicide bombing innocent civilians and trying to impose oppressive laws you're definitely not fighting for "freedom".

 

[medicnick83]

Yeah, USA do, I mean, you can't take on USA directly... so the only way to fight them now is this way... IED's etc...

If this was a WAR, USA would lose, it's not really a WAR, but USA like to call it a WAR.

 

[Alan]

I can't remember you providing any fact yourself buddy, at least everyone else try, you just make farting sounds

btw no one has ever achieved to overthrow my statements, simply because they are within themselves fact... just not the kind you digest easily.

/me walks off playground with arrogant grin on face

LOL yeah like when you make an outragous claim blacks are "sub-ordinate humans" in the U.S. Pointing out the secretary of state is in fact black is not "overthrowing your statement"

What an odd little world you live in

// Back to topic

 

[Alan]

before 9/11, terrorists never existed. since the wars, they are popping out all over the damn place. America have themselves to blame.

This is just getting pathetic

For how and why read the article. Its a religious-based ideology but its not pure religion, just motivated/inspired by it. If you're suicide bombing innocent civilians and trying to impose oppressive laws you're definitely not fighting for "freedom".

Exactly. Interesting article Syndyre. A few fundamental flaws IMO that I'll point out but I seem to have been distracted by you know who.

 

[Syndyre]

Exactly. Interesting article Syndyre. A few fundamental flaws IMO that I'll point out but I seem to have been distracted by you know who.

Yeah I didn't agree with all of it but overall it seems to be pretty accurate.

 

[mercurial]

This is just getting pathetic

you can deny and fart about it all you want, but the fact remains, before 9/11 no one ever heard of suicide bombers. yeah maybe now and then you would here it, but now they are all over the bladdy place. so do yourself a favour, and stop farting and actually contribute to the thread.

 

[Syndyre]

you can deny and fart about it all you want, but the fact remains, before 9/11 no one ever heard of suicide bombers. yeah maybe now and then you would here it, but now they are all over the bladdy place. so do yourself a favour, and stop farting and actually contribute to the thread.

What about the embassy bombings in Africa, previous WTC bombing etc? IIRC suicide bombing was actually "pioneered" by the Tamil Tigers, nothing to do with the USA.

 

[mercurial]

What about the embassy bombings in Africa, previous WTC bombing etc? IIRC suicide bombing was actually "pioneered" by the Tamil Tigers, nothing to do with the USA.

ur missing my point. the point i'm trying to make is that since the wars, suicide bombers are popping up everywhere. they were in no way so overpopulated as we see nowadays.

 

[Syndyre]

ur missing my point. the point i'm trying to make is that since the wars, suicide bombers are popping up everywhere. they were in no way so overpopulated as we see nowadays.

Maybe so but that's not necessarily because of Iraq.

 

[d0b33]

before 9/11, terrorists never existed. since the wars, they are popping out all over the damn place. America have themselves to blame.

That's not true, Terrorism (modern day) has been on the rise since the 70's

But I agree with you that people who think that the war on terrorism is a winnable war deserve to be laughed at.

 

[trek_mambo]

LOL yeah like when you make an outragous claim blacks are "sub-ordinate humans" in the U.S. Pointing out the secretary of state is in fact black is not "overthrowing your statement"

What an odd little world you live in

// Back to topic

Please edit this post and then provide a link to where I said that because people might misconstrue what I meant and think i'm no better than you.
btw the fact that you can count the amount of black people in power positions in the states is justification to my point. I can't count how many white people are in power positions.

This is just getting pathetic




Exactly. Interesting article Syndyre. A few fundamental flaws IMO that I'll point out but I seem to have been distracted by you know who.

Fart

Maybe so but that's not necessarily because of Iraq.

Huh? What are saying?

 

[Alan]

Maybe so but that's not necessarily because of Iraq.

If they weren't suicide bombing in Iraq they'd be doing it in Afghanistan.

Honestly if nobody confronted the nazis the S.S wouldn't have run around commting as many war crimes as they did

 

[Syndyre]

Huh? What are saying?

Mercurial seems to be implying that the Americans invading Iraq is what's causing suicide bombing, at least I presume that's his point.

 

[knobshine]

I don't think the War on Terror is ever supposed to end, just be sustained.
America needs a enemy so the Government has something to protect the people from. Its all very 1984 (it's actually very scary how it's heading that way)

They are already turning their own people into terrorists, apparently just running an anti american blog constitutes terrorism according to the new patriot act. Which means they can arrest and interrogate you without any court hearing or anything.

 

[mercurial]

Mercurial seems to be implying that the Americans invading Iraq is what's causing suicide bombing, at least I presume that's his point.

well you can't deny the fact that since they invaded, terrorism shot thru the roof. it's not a co-incidence.

 

[LoneGunman]

'wars on terrorism' cant be won. The only way to win against any non-regular warfare is by POLITICAL ACTION. Not 'military' action.

Pick just about any so-called war between a) a formal regular standing army and b) a guerrilla/'terrorist'/liberation movement - the only way to resolve the conflict is to engage politically.

Something the British eventually discovered, for instance, with the IRA. And which the SA government finally discovered, with the ANC.

A war against an irregular army, cannot be 'won'.

But technically, the overall idea of what the 'war on terror' actually is, is faulty to begin with.

Technically, there's a fair amount of evidence to demonstrate that much of the so-called enemy in this 'war of terror' - is imaginary or created by Western intelligence services, in order to boost the profit making of the military industrial complex.

I'd recommend folks watch the uber-intensive 3 part BBC series 'The Power of Nightmares' - most importantly, the final episode, where it is demonstrated fairly thoroughly, that 'Al Qeada' doesn't exist much, except as a false construct created deliberately by Intelligence services, in order to create a suitable 'enemy' for society and industry to focus on.

Remember of course, that 'Al Qeada' (which means 'the database') was the name given by the CIA, to the computer file listing the names of their own CIA-trained irregular forces, fighting the Soviets during that country's occupation of Afghanistan.

So America's 'terrorists' were created by itself, and trained by itself - and now there's a mixture of what's known as 'blowback' occurring, along with major profiteering by US military industry..

The war on terror is very very good for US business, and focusing its sheeple population on some faintly racist idea of an 'enemy'. You might also want to look up 'false flag operations' - to get another layer to the complexity..

""Why of course the people don't want war. Why should some poor slob on
a farm want to risk his life in a war when the best he can get out of
it is to come back to his farm in one piece? Naturally the common people
don't want war neither in Russia, nor in England, nor for that matter in
Germany. That is understood. But, after all, it is the leaders of the
country who determine the policy and it is always a simple matter to
drag the people along, whether it is a democracy, or a fascist
dictatorship, or a parliament, or a communist dictatorship. Voice or no
voice, the people can always be brought to the bidding of the leaders.
That is easy. All you have to do is tell them they are being attacked,
and denounce the peacemakers for lack of patriotism and exposing the
country to danger. It works the same in any country."
by:

Hermann Goering
(1893-1946) Commander-in-Chief of the Luftwaffe, President of the Reichstag,
Prime Minister of Prussia and, as Hitler's designated successor, the second man in the Third Reich.

 

[trek_mambo]

If they weren't suicide bombing in Iraq they'd be doing it in Afghanistan.

Honestly if nobody confronted the nazis the S.S wouldn't have run around commting as many war crimes as they did

Germany, Italy and Japan are three countries.
Terrorism is and Ideology

You can Nuke a country but you can kill an ideology.

Mercurial seems to be implying that the Americans invading Iraq is what's causing suicide bombing, at least I presume that's his point.

I believe that Terrorism is not only the result of IRaq but also the cause Iraq was invaded in the first place. Thus terrorism is a motive. Thus the reason we hear so much about terrorism is a motive for the US to attack random brown countries. This lends to the idea that terrorism within itself might be propagated by the US gov themselves as to gain support for their war on random countries.

I don't think the War on Terror is ever supposed to end, just be sustained.
America needs a enemy so the Government has something to protect the people from. Its all very 1984 (it's actually very scary how it's heading that way)

They are already turning their own people into terrorists, apparently just running an anti american blog constitutes terrorism according to the new patriot act. Which means they can arrest and interrogate you without any court hearing or anything.

Agreed I have similar concerns, the US is a War State which will declare war on anyone anywhere so *shhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh* we might be next

 

[bodhi]

Yes - but not by means of conventional military action.

 

[Nanfeishen]

Its a religious-based ideology but its not pure religion, just motivated/inspired by it. If you're suicide bombing innocent civilians and trying to impose oppressive laws you're definitely not fighting for "freedom".

Any ideology inspired by or motivated by religion, is a religious ideology, all be it warped or corrupted to suit the purposes of those involved.
Suicide bombings aside, i was refering to countries labelling legitimate organisations such as Animal activist, or Eco groups as terrorist organisations, or as organisations that engage in "domestic terrorism", and where opposition such as slashing tyres, spiking trees, releasing lab animals is no longer viewed or dealt with as vandalism and seen as civil cases, are now being viewed as "Eco-Terrorism" and charges are being brought not of vandalism, but of terrorism.
In other words the word "terrorist" is being thrown around left right and centre to mark any group or individual who wishes to take action no matter how small against official policy.

The term 'eco-terrorism' would be defined into law by draft legislation as The_Animal_and_Ecological_Terrorism_Act which proposes provisions to target those deemed to have encouraged, assisted or financed offences under its extraordinarily broad definition of 'terrorism'.

In an article for Tom Paine, Karen Charman noted that the draft legislation would effectively ban environmental and animal rights advocacy. The Texas bill, she wrote, defines an "animal rights or terrorist organization" as "two or more persons organized for the purpose of supporting any politically motivated activity intended to obstruct or deter any person from participating in an activity involving animals or... natural resources." [17]

"'Political motivation' means an intent to influence a government entity or the public to take a specific political action," the bill states.

By such definitions, the Green Party of the United States would certainly qualify as guilty of eco-terrorism for its various demonstrations and support of political actions to influence government or the public. And so would the over one hundred other such parties in all democracies on the Earth. However, such parties all include change through the legislative process itself and support change through peaceful means. Such lobbying or influencing would seem to be illegal under the Act.

So even peacefull lobbying and political stances by environmentalists and animal activists are now being labelled under "domestic terrorism".

T.W.A.T. has no boundaries.

 

[Syndyre]

well you can't deny the fact that since they invaded, terrorism shot thru the roof. it's not a co-incidence.

It could be, 9/11 happened before Iraq and that's been the worst terrorist attack so far, maybe that was the start of a bigger campaign?