Experts Say America Is Losing War on Terror

Originally posted by Stumason
So before you invaded Iraq, you had constant attacks in the US? That is what you imply! Prior to 9/11, you had at least a 7 year gap since the last incident of Islamic Terror. Now, since 9/11, whilst it might not be in the US, Islamic Terror has increased exponentially....

I am well aware of that, I was responding to the previous poster’s assertion than “attack intentions” have increased against the US. Now it would make sense that if more people want to attack the US that attacks would have occurred even in an interval of four years. Since there have been no attacks on US soil after 9/11 it must be because we’re doing something right in preventing them, correct?

Originally posted by WestPoint23
I am well aware of that, I was responding to the previous poster’s assertion than “attack intentions” have increased against the US. Now it would make sense that if more people want to attack the US that attacks would have occurred even in an interval of four years. Since there have been no attacks on US soil after 9/11 it must be because we’re doing something right in preventing them, correct?

But thats "fuzzy logic" at best, at worst, it's typicle Bush thinking.

Its like me getting stung by a wasp for the first time in years and then smashing a wasp's nest. I then don't get stung for years after that, so me smashing the wasp's nest in the first place must have prevented me from being stung, right?

Completely ignoring the fact people are still being stung left and right all over the place, I must be winning the war against wasps as I haven't been stung since, even though I wasn't really stung that often anyway!

Originally posted by stumason
Its like me getting stung by a wasp for the first time in years and then smashing a wasp's nest. I then don't get stung for years after that, so me smashing the wasp's nest in the first place must have prevented me from being stung, right?

Completely ignoring the fact people are still being stung left and right all over the place, I must be winning the war against wasps as I haven't been stung since, even though I wasn't really stung that often anyway!

Best analogy EVER.

[edit on 24/11/2005 by slink]

Originally posted by slink

Originally posted by stumason
Its like me getting stung by a wasp for the first time in years and then smashing a wasp's nest. I then don't get stung for years after that, so me smashing the wasp's nest in the first place must have prevented me from being stung, right?

Completely ignoring the fact people are still being stung left and right all over the place, I must be winning the war against wasps as I haven't been stung since, even though I wasn't really stung that often anyway!

Best analogy EVER.

[edit on 24/11/2005 by slink]

I try to please

LOL some of you people are priceless.

FlyersFan:

If stopping the slaughter of hundreds of thousands of Iraqi
citizens is disasterous ...

Saddam slaughtered hundreds of thousands over a 30 year period? You're up to, what, let's say 60,000 Iraqi civilian "accidental" deaths in 2+ years?

Dead is dead. You''re killing more than Saddam.

If stopping the genocide of the kurds is disasterous ..

What genocide? After the first Gulf War when you prompted the Kurds to revolt and then let Saddam use his helicopters to brutally quell the resistance? Is that what you're talking about? Or is it what happened decades ago that was all right with your country at the time, and which didn't even make a dent in your business transactions with Saddam? Rumsfeld still shook his hand, didn't he? And smiled?

If stopping the mass torture chambers is disasterous ...

Haha, you are using the same torture rooms as Saddam did, just using different torture techniques in a different language.

If giving the Iraqis their first FREE elections in 40 years is disasterous ....

FREE? LOL. Can they vote for an Islamic state? Weren’t people afraid to announce themselves as candidates because they were getting MURDERED?

You cannot have a FREE election when your country is under military occupation, haha.

If giving the Iraqis the ability to bring about their own constitution
is disasterous ... (which they did!)

The EASIEST part is establishing a constitution (which incidentally they have not). The hard part is FOLLOWING it, just ask the Bush administration.

It’s like saying, well we elected a President now we’re a democracy. Very Speak’n’Spellian of you.

If rebuilding schools without the stockpiles of weapons and explosives
in them is disasterous ...

And rebuilding bridges, hospitals, water treatment facilities too, yeah that’s all great.

Problem is you blew them up to begin with. So, um, that one’s voided.

If Afghan girls finally going to school is disasterous ...

Um, what does allowing Afghan women to go to school have to do with the War on Terror? Are they going to Islamic madrases? What are they learning? Do they still have to wear their veils? None of this has anything to do with terrorism, but good effort.

If the world finally waking up to the destruction and hate of the
radical muslim Wahabbism is disasterous ...

Really? Isn’t the United States still doing business with Saudi Arabia, which is the origin of Wahabbist terrorism? Weren’t a bunch of the hijackers on 9-11 actually Saudis?

Isn’t the world waking up to the destruction and hate of terrorism because in fact it is more predominant now than ever.

There was NEVER a suicide bomber under Saddam’s rule. Now there are 5-10 a day, with hundreds of dead Iraqis every week. You now have Iraqi terrorists blowing stuff up in Jordan. Way to go!



You are bankrupting your country, killing terrorists who are immediately replaced by two more, and alienating the entire rest of the world. Way to go! And don't worry, it'll be your children and their children who will ultimately foot the bill. Hopefully just in US dollars, not in blood.

Because what exactly are you going to do? Kill all terrorists in the world and then everyone will be one happy family? Develop a DNA testing method to screen for terrorists and then kill them? And is for all terrorists or just for anti-US terrorists. Targetting any fundamentalist Israel terror groups? Hmm?

How much has the war cost so far? 400 billion? You ought to have smarter people in the DoD. People who read history.

People who know you can never win a war against insurgents. People who know a rifle will NEVER bring about peace and prosperity. Maybe next election....

It is less a War on Terror than a War on Reason.



jako





[edit on 25-11-2005 by Jakomo]

[edit on 25-11-2005 by Jakomo]

^^ well put man. how exactly do you measure if you 'win' a war? i didnt think it was possible to win a war

Originally posted by The Dreaded One
^^ well put man. how exactly do you measure if you 'win' a war? i didnt think it was possible to win a war

Thats right.

It's whoever loses least that ends up on top.

WW2 cost the UK it's Empire, bankrupted us (which has knock on effects like canning our space programme, which was one of the most advanced at the time), killed a generation and ruined our cities.

We "won", but at what cost?

Originally posted by stumason

Originally posted by WestPoint23
I am well aware of that, I was responding to the previous poster’s assertion than “attack intentions” have increased against the US. Now it would make sense that if more people want to attack the US that attacks would have occurred even in an interval of four years. Since there have been no attacks on US soil after 9/11 it must be because we’re doing something right in preventing them, correct?

But thats "fuzzy logic" at best, at worst, it's typicle Bush thinking.

Its like me getting stung by a wasp for the first time in years and then smashing a wasp's nest. I then don't get stung for years after that, so me smashing the wasp's nest in the first place must have prevented me from being stung, right?

Completely ignoring the fact people are still being stung left and right all over the place, I must be winning the war against wasps as I haven't been stung since, even though I wasn't really stung that often anyway!

voted way above

further more terrorism is an ideology. there simply is no way to defeat it. americans can be anti-US terrorists. in fact, ANYONE can be a terrorist. so truth being the only for the government to stop terrorism is to kill of the entire world, including their own citizens.

your only freedom fighters if you fight for the US way.

[edit on 25-11-2005 by grimreaper797]

Sorry, but the "War on Terror" will never be over, it will not slow, nor will it be in just one country.

The "War on Terror" is something that is just getting its strength up, & getting rolling along like a steamroller. The mass public believes this is something that is good & benevolent, & boy are they stupid.

A terrorist, by the governments definition isn't just some Arab with a towel on his head & a bomb in his backpack or packed explosives in the trunk of his car's trunk. A terrorist, by definition, is someone who scares the public into submission, who makes people fear him by his/her actions. By that definition, computer hackers are terrorists, so is the neighbor next door that's a little on the scary side, so it the mass meeting of the KKK standing down in some swamp in Mississippi (I am not defending these people, I am only saying open your eyes, I'm very much against the KKK's ignorances, & computer hacking is a crime).

The government wants you to look out at Iraq & Iran, & the rest of the World to see "terrorsists", because sooner or later, they will turn the publics eyes back in towards itself, & make you see the terrorists on our own soil.

It starts with "community watches" & spying on your neighbors. Oohh...I saw Jimmy Joe come home last night, & boy her was stumbling around like he'd drunk a water tower full of alcohol.....or Suzy Q, she's just a slut, I saw her out with 5 guys at once, she probably screwed everyone of those guys, they all looked so happy after being out with her.

Don't buy into the ignorances, don't but into spying on your neighbors, don't buy anything the government is trying to sell you. They will be coming for your guns soon enough, becuase you might actually be a terrorist, by their definition, but in reality, it's more because you might actually rebel against theiry tyrannical rule & overthrow them thru a second revolution.

Originally posted by ADVISOR
I don't know about losing the war, but the will for it has dropped.

What needs to be done is Iraqinization, they need to be responcible for themselves. Other nations can't just be expected to pick up other countries humpty dumpties, and put them back tohgether agian. But the sad truth is that is an expected thing, dependance on others is not strength. They want us out, yet they can't even keep the country in any form of order.

If the US pulled out, it would turn right back into the same third world country it was before US media got there. You want the USA out of IRAQ, show the people there who are trying to make a difference, that they have every ones fullest support, instead of critising them. You are not there, you dont know first hand about squat, try walking inthe shoes of those who have to live with the extreamists, the Shiites, and Sunnis, the people who enforce cutting off of hands for stealing. Go see what it is like with out sitting in front of a TV or radio, let alone a computer.
Until that much has been done, no one should say anythig about another until they have walked in that others shoes, even if for one step.

Don't like how the military does things, go to college and get a degree, then join the Armed Forces as an officer and make the changes from within.

Talk is cheap and, action has always been louder than words.

Why is the war being lost, I say it is because the media says so. If the news reported how we were kicking ass and taking names, and never mentioned the bad stuff, no one would know better. It would be "sanitised".

Your propaganda, my propaganda, the news propaganda, it is all propaganda. What about other conflicts going on, what about the war in Afghanistan, are we losing there too, no one would know if the media didn't tell you. No one even knew where Basra was until it was on TV.

Go ahead and focus on the negative, contribute and bask in the seperation that divides people. One may want unity and peace, they may want good things for others, but if they contribute to the polarization by continueing to drive the wedge bewteen those they are trying to reach, what good does it do.

Like begets like, the problem in the middle east did not start when we stepped foot on their soil. It has been going on for THOUSANDS OF YEARS, it is a biblical war. This is not going to end when US leaves, to believe other wise is foolish and unrealistic.
Those people need to know some one will stand by them, they have no leadership, no formal form of government other than Saddam.

How much better would they be, if they were left hanging on alone...

I don't believe terror has spread since 9/11, but it has become a major focus of the news. I remember inthe eighties terror was mentioned as a problem. But it was not given any concearn until it happened here on US soil, then all of a sudden it was a issue. Not that the rest of the world wasn't dealing with it already, it was. It just wasn't profitable until recently.

Three strange things in the world: loving war more than peace, loving excess more than sufficiency, and loving falsehood more than truth

actions only speak louder than words when you are dealing with a listener who has been subjected to nothing else other than actual and physical reinforcement as opposed to logical verbal interpretation. I cannot say that in all the cases I have witnessed action used as opposed to words, it was justified based upon the credentials of the listener.

Originally posted by stumason
But thats "fuzzy logic" at best, at worst, it's typicle Bush thinking.

Its like me getting stung by a wasp for the first time in years and then smashing a wasp's nest. I then don't get stung for years after that, so me smashing the wasp's nest in the first place must have prevented me from being stung, right?

Completely ignoring the fact people are still being stung left and right all over the place, I must be winning the war against wasps as I haven't been stung since, even though I wasn't really stung that often anyway!

***Removes stinger***

Well IMO if you did do that technically you WOULD be winning A war on wasps, not the overall one mind you, but the one involving the poor brave wasps inside that you so cold heartedly killed....

Wasp killer ! ***Throws stinger at stu***

Originally posted by ADVISOR
I don't know about losing the war, but the will for it has dropped.

What needs to be done is Iraqinization, they need to be responcible for themselves. Other nations can't just be expected to pick up other countries humpty dumpties, and put them back tohgether agian. But the sad truth is that is an expected thing, dependance on others is not strength. They want us out, yet they can't even keep the country in any form of order.

What makes you think Iraq wants picking up by the USA? Its your country who invaded a pretty stable country and turned it into a warzone, its the USA who has displaced thousands and killed thousands more, so it should be your DUTY to help them with the mess you created. I guess they arnt human enough for you to help unlike your american friends.