It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Would American Terrorists be as affective overseas as foreign born terrorists are here?

page: 1
0

log in

join
share:

posted on Apr, 12 2006 @ 10:05 AM
link   
We(the U.S. and allies) are going broke trying to fight this war on terror. Would it of been cheaper and as affective to send American trained terrorists to blow up the middle east and other sponsors of terror.

Sometimes in war as in life you have to play dirty to win.

Where do you think a foreign policy such as this would of gotten us in the middle east/the world?

I envision the U.S. going about supporting terrorists such as Iran and others do with Monetary donations and other than that they "aren't really" associated with the government. The U.S., in this THEORETICAL war, would not come out saying it supports terrorists it would be more inclined to say that terrorists are unpredictable and you never know how they feel and who are their enemies. So in turn, you will never know who or what the target is.




posted on Apr, 12 2006 @ 11:22 AM
link   
This is a novel idea in theory, that's for sure. But I don't think in the real world it's feasible.
The whole terrorist mentality requires (generally) a certain mind-set that is not really prevalent in the U.S.
For example, in WWII we were subjected to Kamikaze attacks. We didn't respond with our own kamikazes. We just dropped more and bigger bombs.
People can debate which option is in fact more "terroristic" in nature. I just don't think that you'd find that many Americans willing to strap dynamite to their chests. Wheras you can find plenty to make and run bombers.



posted on Apr, 12 2006 @ 02:33 PM
link   

Originally posted by passenger
This is a novel idea in theory, that's for sure. But I don't think in the real world it's feasible.
The whole terrorist mentality requires (generally) a certain mind-set that is not really prevalent in the U.S.
For example, in WWII we were subjected to Kamikaze attacks. We didn't respond with our own kamikazes. We just dropped more and bigger bombs.
People can debate which option is in fact more "terroristic" in nature. I just don't think that you'd find that many Americans willing to strap dynamite to their chests. Wheras you can find plenty to make and run bombers.


I completely agree but don't you think that the U.S could perfect the terrorist. First off, not making him be a suicide bomber more like an off the books CIA agent, Instead of just getting intel they would be coordinating acts of terrorism on the countries respensible for financing our terrorism.

This would definately make the situation more complicated and in turn make the opposing country feel even more vulnerable and desperate.

It might be a decent idea to create a team of them and throw them into a country in which we want to stir enough drama to get a revolt.

Terror is all that is required not suicide necessarily.



posted on Apr, 15 2006 @ 02:59 PM
link   
This is a good subject I wish we had others that wanted to chime in. Think about how much money we would save sending in a group of them instead of our Army.



new topics

top topics
 
0

log in

join