A cure for terrorists...a modest proposal

What do you do to domestic terrorist then, nuke texas or something? And what if the government was involved in 1993 WTC bombing, oklahoma city bombing etc. like some believe, nuke the white house?
Not to mention the fact that somewhere I recently saw a statistic that 95% of people charged with terrorism are innocent (correct me if I'm wrong). Anyway very likely you'd end up lobotimising a rather large number of innocent people.
IMO the "war" on terrorism shouldn't be fought like it is today, it should be fought with police and spy tactics with only military involvement when larger targets like camps need to be taken out. It shouldn't be something that the media even knows of. Cooperation between intelligence services and precision removal of terrorist cells would be so much better. Again just my opinion

Originally posted by mclarenmp4
the war on terrorism is more than likely creating more terrorists than we are capturing/killing.

Nope. There were terrorists and terrorist attacks LONG before the War on Terror got going. The terrorists don't need an excuse .. this is part of who they are.

There is no cure for a terrorist - except a bullet in the brain.
Find them. Shoot them dead. The end.

Originally posted by JackofBlades
My view is that America is nothing but a terrorist state,

:shk:

terrorists

[edit on 6/16/2007 by FlyersFan]

Originally posted by PsykoOps
What do you do to domestic terrorist then, nuke texas or something? And what if the government was involved in 1993 WTC bombing, oklahoma city bombing etc. like some believe, nuke the white house?
Not to mention the fact that somewhere I recently saw a statistic that 95% of people charged with terrorism are innocent (correct me if I'm wrong). Anyway very likely you'd end up lobotimising a rather large number of innocent people.
IMO the "war" on terrorism shouldn't be fought like it is today, it should be fought with police and spy tactics with only military involvement when larger targets like camps need to be taken out. It shouldn't be something that the media even knows of. Cooperation between intelligence services and precision removal of terrorist cells would be so much better. Again just my opinion

I totally agree.
Besides we have to get more indepent from natural resources and the ME therein. Terrorist campaigns would not just stop. As said before lots of muslim elements keeps on going till either we're killed or converted.
I think the situation for the US is more complicated, me as a EU citizen think we should invest more in [counter] espionage in our own territory, like we did before with terrorist groups, "bug" appartments en then rent it to suspected terrorist groups. Bug those Mosques as well..Hell, here in the Hague they spring up like mushrooms, and not the nice looking ones, buildings to louche to mention, with eyepatch-imams like in London speaking of our destruction and so on..
The gamma knife thing is interesting, we really should propose that for child rapist, seriar killers, people for the arrangement proposition[TBS], as we call it, mentally ill..those should include people as well who think they go to heaven where 40 virgins awaits as soon as they blow up themselves..and also the "brains" behind those ops

[edit on 16-6-2007 by Foppezao]

Originally posted by NovusOrdoMundi

Imagine if you were in a poor third world country. You had nothing but some rock house and your family. Then some country that has more wealth, technology, and comfort of living than they need and that you can possibly imagine, comes into your land, runs you from your homes, and steals your nation's one exported resource, the one thing stopping your country from collapsing economically, and they shove all the profits in their pockets. How would you feel?

Well, the last time I checked, the Saudis, Kuwaitis, Omanis, Bahrainis, even the Iranians were doing quite well selling their oil. We didn't take it from them; we buy it from them. If we didn't buy it, they would really have nothing.

I like the idea of pig's blood; that worked for fighting the islamics in the Phillipines; I forget who had the great idea. They killed all but one with bullets dipped in pigs blood and sent the last terrorist back to his villiage. The terrorism stopped. Perfect example of asymmetrical warfare.

I don't understand why we have to stoop to their level to fight them. We have nukes, chemical weapons, bio-weapons, the above-mentioned gamma knife, even pig's blood for god's sake and we insist on riding around in humvees and shooting them 1 by 1 with bullets!!!? Come on. This is just for the mutual masturbation of the generals who like to push little models around on a map. Why are we fighting world war 1 in Iraq? If we really wanted to get rid of these sobs we could do it in 20 minutes.

Originally posted by bsbray11
I have an even more modest proposal: develop a virus to wipe out the whole rest of the world. Then the US will never have to worry about foreign policy ever again. Plus free oil and other resources.

That is rather sick.

you can't just labotomise the terrorists, that would end the whole ''war on terror'' thing, do you have any idea how long it took the military-industrial complex to set this up? first they had to make the american population dumb enough and placid enough to believe whatever politicians and the media told them, then they had to arm and train a whole bunch of third world citizens in the art of terrorism, which wasn't easy i can tell you, and then they had to get a guy elected that could barely string a coherent sentence together never mind run a presidential campaign, i mean have you ever tried to get people who believe the world is flat to register to vote? that bit was harder than training the third world citizens, and now you want to offer a quick and easy solution to their greatest money spinning exercise ever, you have some neck, this thing is going to need to run for well over a century to make the investment worthwhile.

It occurs to me, that you are looking at this in the wrong light.

You don't so much need to get to the terrorits, but get to the Muslium religious leaders who teach murder and death.

If they preached peace and love-isn't Islam supposed to be the religion of love and caring???, then there followers would look to make peace and care for ALL people.

They should NOT be glorifing murder, dressing 3 year old child as a marter-just sicking

Originally posted by pieman
you can't just labotomise the terrorists, that would end the whole ''war on terror'' thing, do you have any idea how long it took the military-industrial complex to set this up? first they had to make the american population dumb enough and placid enough to believe whatever politicians and the media told them, then they had to arm and train a whole bunch of third world citizens in the art of terrorism, which wasn't easy i can tell you, and then they had to get a guy elected that could barely string a coherent sentence together never mind run a presidential campaign, i mean have you ever tried to get people who believe the world is flat to register to vote? that bit was harder than training the third world citizens, and now you want to offer a quick and easy solution to their greatest money spinning exercise ever, you have some neck, this thing is going to need to run for well over a century to make the investment worthwhile.

Yes, you are quite right. I should have looked at it from that angle. I guess we shall have to let Halliburton et al run the detention camps for about 2 billion of the world's people, the lobotomizing machines, and even develop the killer virus, the vaccine for the Americans just to make this scheme have any chance of working. Maybe Jeb will run some day.

Originally posted by mrmonsoon
It occurs to me, that you are looking at this in the wrong light.

You don't so much need to get to the terrorits, but get to the Muslium religious leaders who teach murder and death.

If they preached peace and love-isn't Islam supposed to be

the religion of love and caring???

, then there followers would look to make peace and care for ALL people.

They should NOT be glorifing murder, dressing 3 year old child as a marter-just sicking

The problem is, the muslim world hasnt got the same large hierarchical structure as..say the catholic church that goes topdown.
A more fundamental problem is, people always talk about" there are so many moderate muslims around the world", but the fact is. They lack self criticism and self reflection.Signaling problems within the community and talk about it.The fundamentalist should be called back.... Something we he have learnt during the enlightment..


btw the pigblood was discusses 2 years ago on ats
www.abovetopsecret.com...

interesting, if your enemy has this sick delusions about 72 virgins, you should fight them in that same delusion[if it works on 1 terrorist? why not?]..and if they dont buy it..why al this bs about pigs being impure?..

[edit on 18-6-2007 by Foppezao]

Originally posted by JIMC5499

Originally posted by marg6043
Lets force our government to stop depending on foreign oil and start looking for fuel alternative in our own lands.

That will stop the madness in the middle east for sure.

marg,

I agree with you on ending our dependance on foreign oil, but I don't think that it will do anything to solve the problems in the Middle East.

Hmm...I wonder what american citizens would do if a way more powerful country than themselves - let's pretend it's a moslem/non-christian country as well - invaded the US, toppled the US government, and took control?

Sometimes you need to put the shoe on the other foot. Invading other people's countries, muslim ones in particular, will pretty well guarantee you an upsurge in moslem fanatacism. Moslem fanatacism leads to terrorism and polarisation.

Not a good thing really if you want to stamp out terror.

What the original poster of this thread is suggesting was already tried by another country, in another era...

Nazi Germany!

They did very similar things to their opponents and social 'un-desirables' - including Gypsies, Homosexuals, Jews and Communists. This form of medical violence usually occurred in concentration camps.

I think we all remember those don't we?

Nope....this is a very bad idea...

I mean - if the US government got the go-ahead with something like this - and they were happy with the results too - who would be next? Gays? Common crimminals? Tax evaders? Political adversaries? Left-wing authors? Foreign leaders?

You get the picture I think...

Jimbo999

yes it will, because now the west will care little about the stability of their region, forcing themn to realize that they no longer have oil so they will have to change their ways and in some other way become a functioning part of the world community or they wll never get anywhere.

Hey J I agree but lets get all the terrorists, the Americans, the British, Israelis, Blair, Bush, Rice, Cheney and the rest of the war criminals and while were at it people who think like you.

Terrorism exists for a number of reasons usually,

The occupation of ones country by foreign forces.

A stronger nation attacking a weaker one.

Ideologies different to yours being forced upon you.

Your way of life, traditions, religion etc. being destroyed.

Your country held to ranson by a stonger poweretc. etc. etc.

All the above give rise to terrorism, but as you may live in a nice safe country and dont have to watch your way of life go down the pan, see your family and friends, murdered, tortured, bombed, gassed, imprisoned without trial or they just disapear then you will have no understanding of terrorism or the reasons for it.

As I have said many times before one mans terrorist is another mans freedom fighter. May you live a long life in which you never have to endure the above and to have to make the decision that you will have to fight to protect that what is most precious to you.

It’s an interesting and original idea but also a truly evil one. I find it hard to contemplate a worst way of treating an individual than directly messing with their brain.
It would mean a terrorist was under any circumstances better blowing themselves up than surrendering, it would dehumanise America or the West’s reputation in the eyes of many human beings, and wherever this happens abroad it would make the fight against terrorism (e.g. getting people to become informers) that much harder, and of course would cause a small (but admittedly probably quite small tolerable-insignificant) rise in terrorism itself.

As a human being I can support giving terrorists the death penalty, even though I'm (as a general rule) against the death penalty for all other crimes. I support capital punishment for terrorists for the simple reason that whenever leading terrorists are prison they often serve as a rallying ground for kidnappings of innocent people, or other acts of terrorism less they be released. Killing the terrorists in the first place would eradicate this area of rallying (and or) propaganda.

But morally I can never support this kind of sick punishment. I doubt it has that much deterrent than capital punishment as no doubt the stupid terrorist will believe they will get their brain back in the afterlife.
The only way I would be less hostile is if it was used solely as an alternative to the death penalty, and even then I fear it won’t be as acceptable in the minds of citizens worldwide, than in comparison to the traditional stately execution.

Furthermore: If you advocate using you’re “treatment” as a punishment the terrorist could not in anyway avoid, then you have to think how bad this will be when innocent people are “treated”; especially as it is now clear that perhaps over half the people Guantanamo are innocent.