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.

 

The War on Terror Is Over!

page: 1
5
<<   2  3 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Apr, 24 2012 @ 03:22 AM
link   
Well, it would seem it's official!


"The war on terror is over," a senior official in the State Department official tells the National Journal. "Now that we have killed most of al Qaida, now that people have come to see legitimate means of expression, people who once might have gone into al Qaida see an opportunity for a legitimate Islamism."



For the president himself, this new thinking comes from a "realiz[ation that] he has no choice but to cultivate the Muslim Brotherhood and other relatively 'moderate' Islamist groups emerging as lead political players out of the Arab Spring in Egypt, Tunisia and elsewhere."

This new outlook is radically different than what was expressed under President George W. Bush immediately after September 11, 2001. "Over time it's going to be important for nations to know they will be held accountable for inactivity," Bush said on November 6, 2001. "You're either with us or against us in the fight against terror."
Source

Now I would so love for this to be true. We DO need to get out of those places and end these wars where we are there as combatants. We need to drop the offensive being run all over the world, as it would seem to be. This is absurd, wrong and totally self defeating. Perhaps if we even seemed to care about WINNING to end a war anymore, it would be different...but winning isn't even the point. It's just prolonging until it's politically beneficial to turn the whole thing off and start it up somewhere else.


However, having said all of that, it's absolutely insane to sit and talk about the idea that the Muslim Brotherhood be embraced. It would be nice if we didn't work to make new enemies...but you don't kiss a rattlesnake or a scorpion. You treat it with respect or you kill it. You don't hug it or treat it real nice with favored treatment.

In this case, I don't believe those on the other side of this have ANY interest in being friends or working with us. Again, we need to respect and be firm about our own interests, while ending the fighting but these are NOT allies of any kind. We've been fighting them in at least 6 nations for over 10 years now. 2 of those have been full blown, all out theater wars.

Is anyone really thinking we can just call the whole thing a win, pretend it's all over and treat these people like they are our friends? Do we not expect they MIGHT just have a few little hard feelings over the fact it's all been happening for over a decade now?? I mean really. It's insane. Anyone else agree or should we just start pursuing closer and closer relations to those we've just stopped trying to kill on sight?




posted on Apr, 24 2012 @ 03:25 AM
link   
reply to post by Wrabbit2000
 


These are just words spoken by a politician. To me, they mean nothing.

"The war on terror is over" Yeah right. Actions speaks louder than words.

Until America remove all their troops from the middle east, the war on terror is still in full swing. It will not end anytime soon.

vvv
edit on 24-4-2012 by VreemdeVlieendeVoorwep because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 24 2012 @ 03:26 AM
link   
i think they need to get the # out of there but it needs to be very very slowly. for the reason that the place needs to be stabilised before the troops leave. the have known nothing other than bombs and bullets for ten years. i think it would be a bad idea to leave so suddenly IMHO. once the "enemies" realise there is no one to keep them in check they could very well start terrorising their own people again..



posted on Apr, 24 2012 @ 03:28 AM
link   
reply to post by VreemdeVlieendeVoorwep
 
Very true about words on a soundbite, but if this is the prevailing attitude among leaders in Washington, then we'll be even less on the offensive in the areas we are still deployed in as a nation. In these wars, I think it's offense or get out because defense is a losing team on those fields. If we're all defense...well, we need out. bad.

Leaving doesn't mean we embrace the enemy though, right? It's that seeming idea this implies that one must come with the other that I find patently insane.



posted on Apr, 24 2012 @ 03:29 AM
link   
If the war on Terror is truly over, next it will be the war on some other made up enemy.



posted on Apr, 24 2012 @ 03:30 AM
link   

Originally posted by Wrabbit2000
Is anyone really thinking we can just call the whole thing a win, pretend it's all over and treat these people like they are our friends? Do we not expect they MIGHT just have a few little hard feelings over the fact it's all been happening for over a decade now??



I didn't read anywhere where they said it was a "Win" they declared it over. What would you have the US/West do? Keep fighting, killing, spending? Sooner or later it has to end. It seems that no matter how this is handled some will be upset and disagree.


I mean really. It's insane. Anyone else agree or should we just start pursuing closer and closer relations to those we've just stopped trying to kill on sight?


AGAIN, What would you rather the US/West do?
Both sides of the conflict are angry and upset. Both sides have lost people. Fighting has to stop before there can be ANY type of dialogue. Otherwise all we'll be doing is just more killing, fighting and spending etc etc etc

edit on 24-4-2012 by SLAYER69 because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 24 2012 @ 03:30 AM
link   
It's just going to be another post-Cold War era. Whenever the day really does come to pass, then the gargantuan amounts of resources, manpower, and newly founded agencies will have nothing better to do than turn inward and take a dump all over themselves.

The MIC nightmare is back, and this time it's bigger than ever.



posted on Apr, 24 2012 @ 03:38 AM
link   
reply to post by SLAYER69
 

I'd like to think this is about finding a middle road between adversary and ally. Bush treated every Muslim without a security clearance as a very real and potential threat. Obama is coming to look at that same 'everyone' as 100% non-threatening and ones to make new international relations with.

It really would seem something inbetween would be a whole lot more prudent, particularly when not all our actual allies from the wars are in the same position we are or entirely in agreement.

How are US relations...current ones...with Vietnam? Thats AT LEAST where being friendly ought to end, and thats only luke warm at best. No one is fighting...and no one ever will again, I'm sure...but no one is quite stupid enough to honestly open up, either.

The way this reads with the way other events in the past have also run is quite the opposite. Muslim Brotherhood is Egypt which is Israel. That gas line that just got cut? Pressure from cross border strikes out of the Sinai? It's hard to ever look at these things in isolation and making friends in these directions is certainly a move to effect MANY things at once.

End the wars..just don't throw homecoming parties for the ones we've been fighting......while no one will so much as talk about a parade for the men WE HAVE coming back. Sorry.. a little mini-rant on this last line, but that is no less a sore point. These aren't our friends just because ONE man in office and his underlings say so. The OTHER side, not least of which, is likely to disagree...just a little.



posted on Apr, 24 2012 @ 03:45 AM
link   
reply to post by Wrabbit2000
 


Well you're welcome to your opinion but I think you are posting exaggerated slanted examples...

Homecoming parties for our enemies?

Really?

Dialogue with ones enemies has been how most conflicts throughout history brought those conflicts to an end.
edit on 24-4-2012 by SLAYER69 because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 24 2012 @ 03:47 AM
link   

Originally posted by Wrabbit2000

I'd like to think this is about finding a middle road between adversary and ally. Bush treated every Muslim without a security clearance as a very real and potential threat. Obama is coming to look at that same 'everyone' as 100% non-threatening and ones to make new international relations with.





I dont think Bush treated EVERY Muslim as a threat. ONLY these Extremist Muslims......






Obama is carrying on with Bushes "war on terror". He hasnt even attempted to close Gitmo down,like he promised.

Edit to add:

Obama shouldn't have promised anything. Threats to the US,need to be dealt with. I am sure it was a wake up call,to Obama,when he realized that the threat was real.
edit on 24-4-2012 by sonnny1 because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 24 2012 @ 03:49 AM
link   
what Vree said,


once the politician said now that we killed most of al Qaeda,

i wondered why he would imply/admit he knows how many of cia's al Quaeda recruits are still on active/reserve assignment



posted on Apr, 24 2012 @ 03:52 AM
link   

Originally posted by sonnny1

Originally posted by Wrabbit2000

I'd like to think this is about finding a middle road between adversary and ally. Bush treated every Muslim without a security clearance as a very real and potential threat. Obama is coming to look at that same 'everyone' as 100% non-threatening and ones to make new international relations with.


I dont think Bush treated EVERY Muslim as a threat. ONLY these Extremist Muslims......



Obama is carrying on with Bushes "war on terror". He hasnt even attempted to close Gitmo down,like he promised.


Funny thing about signs like that... Someone who would actually do what is said in them, wouldn't be standing around holding a sign that says they would.

Every now and then people are paid to hold those signs for the news cameras too, it's a pretty old trick. (Not saying that is the case here, but worth a mention)



posted on Apr, 24 2012 @ 03:56 AM
link   
reply to post by boncho
 


There was a thread on this,I will have to look it up.No these guys are for real,B.

They want to see Islam dominate the world.



posted on Apr, 24 2012 @ 03:58 AM
link   
reply to post by SLAYER69
 

Well, either way...by judging the stories and headlines out over the past few hours, it'll be a growing issue in the campaigns as things develop.

It sounds like Romney is looking at it and Obama has a few years of history now of specific outreach program aimed entirely at the Muslim world. Not Asia, Africa or South America. Just that specific region. It makes the whole thing interesting to watch play out, but as the people this article is specifically about, the Muslim Brotherhood, are pressuring Israel and making war increasingly likely, it's potential hazardous too.


Another thought occurred to me. Obama is openly talking about getting closer to the Muslim Brotherhood within 24 hours of making stronger moves against Syria, Iran and anyone who would help them. It's as if some in leadership believe these are all unrelated areas and totally isolated. Err.... Yeah..

They don't know each other at all. They just kinda live in nations that sit close by...
(I know you think much deeper than that...but this is how the reports in the news right now are coming off and it's eye opening)

(by the way..I'd said that was a mini-rant..remember? lol... it was meant to be a bit of hyperbole)



posted on Apr, 24 2012 @ 04:04 AM
link   

Originally posted by sonnny1
reply to post by boncho
 


There was a thread on this,I will have to look it up.No these guys are for real,B.

They want to see Islam dominate the world.




There is a story I would like to tell that involves a Muslim friend and a bunch of absurdities that happened regarding his belief in Islam, and outlook on the West. However, I feel it is probably too controversial to mention. Nothing illegal, just not worth the debate or baiting that might ensue.

Needless to say, in any regard, if people are openly calling for the destruction of another nation, group, religion, and doing so publicly... They are pawns.

They are ignorant, stupid, pawns. Being used for the objective of some larger goal, that probably would make their lives worse than better. Nothing more to be said on the matter.

Regards,

B



posted on Apr, 24 2012 @ 04:05 AM
link   

Originally posted by Wrabbit2000
reply to post by SLAYER69
 

Well, either way...by judging the stories and headlines out over the past few hours, it'll be a growing issue in the campaigns as things develop.


Well you nailed that one on the head. Campaign. I'm getting too old to jump when I read stories like this and the various spin that this or that "Reliably Unbiased Source"
puts on it.


It sounds like Romney is looking at it and Obama has a few years of history now of specific outreach program aimed entirely at the Muslim world. Not Asia, Africa or South America. Just that specific region. It makes the whole thing interesting to watch play out, but as the people this article is specifically about, the Muslim Brotherhood, are pressuring Israel and making war increasingly likely, it's potential hazardous too.


You mentioned Vietnam earlier. Well the then perceived potential hazard at the time was walking away from that conflict which might lead to the supposed communist "Domino effect" where countries would continue to fall under the red banner. Well, there was a "Domino Effect" alright. Communism bit the dust they all fell in order one right after the other.


Another thought occurred to me. Obama is openly talking about getting closer to the Muslim Brotherhood within 24 hours of making stronger moves against Syria, Iran and anyone who would help them. It's as if some in leadership believe these are all unrelated areas and totally isolated. Err.... Yeah..


Better the Devil you know?
That only time will tell...



(by the way..I'd said that was a mini-rant..remember? lol... it was meant to be a bit of hyperbole)


I hear ya.



posted on Apr, 24 2012 @ 04:07 AM
link   
reply to post by boncho
 




I hear ya.

Then again,their are many pawns in this game, with real pieces.

Winners and losers.

Have a great nite everyone.


Peace.



posted on Apr, 24 2012 @ 04:11 AM
link   
reply to post by sonnny1
 


That placard I believe was from the protests surrounding the Danish Cartoons. that insulted the prophet.

Anyone know if these fellows were at the protest?


Five suspected Islamist militants have been arrested for planning a gun attack at the Copenhagen offices of a Danish newspaper that printed cartoons of the Prophet Muhammad in 2005, police say.


Source

I would doubt it, although anyone dumb enough to post cards like that in public on their own free will might make a good recruitment prospect.

Hmm... So where does this fit in the thread again? All this talk of mine about pawns and whatnot.

Ahh...


For the president himself, this new thinking comes from a "realiz[ation that] he has no choice but to cultivate the Muslim Brotherhood and other relatively 'moderate' Islamist groups emerging as lead political players out of the Arab Spring in Egypt, Tunisia and elsewhere."


Link

Whoops!

It's almost like, you give a subversive group some legitimacy and they stop influencing guerrilla tactics. Ah, but you would have to admit they were behind some of all the goings on....

Nah, couldn't have been...



posted on Apr, 24 2012 @ 04:12 AM
link   

Originally posted by Wrabbit2000
Well, it would seem it's official!


However, having said all of that, it's absolutely insane to sit and talk about the idea that the Muslim Brotherhood be embraced. It would be nice if we didn't work to make new enemies...but you don't kiss a rattlesnake or a scorpion. You treat it with respect or you kill it. You don't hug it or treat it real nice with favored treatment.

In this case, I don't believe those on the other side of this have ANY interest in being friends or working with us. Again, we need to respect and be firm about our own interests, while ending the fighting but these are NOT allies of any kind. We've been fighting them in at least 6 nations for over 10 years now. 2 of those have been full blown, all out theater wars.

:

we need to take a leaf out of their book , they seem to have "woken up" and are on the way to get what they want. what is so insane about the idea that we should embrace the muslim brotherhood , which would/should SLOW the amount of people being killed or killing themselves in the name of hating westerners . we give them every reason to hate us, maybe we should get the # out of their country and either leave them alone or actually HELP them without blowing up their grandparents and their children. they have the right to expand and develop their country as others have done and continue to do. why not ?
once the killing stops westerners will be able to move to the east and fel they can be "at home" there. people would be surprised as to how beautiful these places are/were before we started dropping shells on them.



posted on Apr, 24 2012 @ 04:20 AM
link   
Who won?



___________________________________________________________________________

And what's our next war going to be?
The War on Lactose Intolerance?
The War on Racists?
The War on Protestors?
The War on Free Speech?
The War on Guns?
The War on Christianity?

*I can hardly wait!*




top topics



 
5
<<   2  3 >>

log in

join