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 best Strike against Terrorism?

page: 1
0

log in

join
share:

posted on Nov, 13 2003 @ 07:52 PM
link   
I remember reading something to this effect before, I'm not sure if on a thread or a news site, but here goes...

Pre-emptive strikes. It's what we just did in Iraq, and rather than helping the war against terror, it seems to be doing the opposite. My thoughts, a war is to large an effort, there are to many extraneous things that go wrong, it is far to big of a target as well.

So how about this, instead of attacking an entire country, we just kill those in charge. I'm not talking about a poisoning or a dagger in the dark, I'm talking about the strategic bombing of a building they sleep in. Or a special ops group sent to eliminate a terrorist leader in his bed. Small, quick operations of this nature. There would be no large scale war to gear up for. Civilian casualties would be drastically reduced. And it would accomplish our goals, eliminating the structure terrorists survive on.

I understand what I advocate is a hair above murder, and in some instances is impractical. But I also believe in can be done and should be done. I would like to hear others' opinions on this, and maybe some examples.



posted on Nov, 13 2003 @ 08:00 PM
link   
1. Read my signature.

2. Murdering a crop of current leaders just provides more false martyrs.

3. People with intelligence get off the industrial-military bandwagon to understand root causes. They are in the anti-American preachings of extremists which can be institutionalised too quickly in the absence of any more reasonable philosophy for the audience.

4. Determine what makes these preachings so appealing and counter that: education, understanding and unstitching subversively and falsely used elements of the qu'ran, diplomatic relations with the countries that allowed for those preachings to have taken place, and all.

Or Plan B: Let matters escalate. Produce more and more weapons to circulate from the biggest rogue nation on the planet to every other one, in the name of profits (not prophets). Preach hatred at home so it can be responded to with hatred by others. Destroy each other as fools do.



[Edited on 13-11-2003 by MaskedAvatar]



posted on Nov, 13 2003 @ 08:46 PM
link   
Um, we DID use strategic bombing. Unfortunetly we didnt have good enough intel on Saddam himself to carry this out effectively. Civilian casualties have been drastically reduced. We might have gotten Saddam if we had just levelled Bagdhad. If we just took out the leadership, and then stepped back, its very likely a civil war would have taken place and many people would have died.



posted on Nov, 13 2003 @ 08:51 PM
link   
Ahhh, a good point. Killing such a leader creates a power vacuum, and thats when the real crazies can rise to power. But it could work. Killing Osama would knock out much of Al Qaeda's funding, just as killing Imad Mughniyah would destroy one of the greatest terrorist geniuses around, thus killing much effectiveness on the terrorist's part. (BTW I hate Imad, and believe him to be the biggest threat to the US)

But wouldn't a civil war accomplish our goals? Cruel as it sounds, if they fight each other they can't fight us, and then we could easily bring in someone friendlier to us.(look at Iran in the 50's) Of course this could easily backfire. But everything has rsiks, no?



posted on Nov, 13 2003 @ 11:36 PM
link   
What about getting Muslims, or others sympathetic to America, and who want to volunteer, to join the ranks of Al Queda, and just slowly corrupt it from within. Forget about striking them back, make them look stupid. Make them look increasingly irrational. Get a TON of other nations pist off at them (which I think WILL happen).

Another idea I had was to get the Mob or some cartel pist at them. Thoughts?



posted on Nov, 14 2003 @ 05:08 PM
link   
getting the mob and cartels pissed off seems to have no real bearing on how it will hurt Al Qaeda. They don't have the power or resources to destroy a whole aorganization.

As to corrupting from within...with a religious organization such as Al Qaeda, with such a clear doctrine, that is difficult at best. We can barely get spies in the periphery networks as is.



posted on Nov, 14 2003 @ 05:27 PM
link   
the only thing you can do to stop terrorism is to wake up, wake up, wake up.


There is NO enemy anywhere - Lao Tse



posted on Nov, 14 2003 @ 05:29 PM
link   
Which is why thousands of people have been killed by terrorism, REAL good response. Next.



posted on Nov, 14 2003 @ 05:39 PM
link   
I had simaliar thoughts. My grandfather told me, when he was in ww2,the Chinese had terrible problems with gangs. So to put the gangs out of business, they would grab the leader or leaders and put a bullet in their heads. Gang problem solved. If a new gang leader took over,they would grab him and shoot him too.
Of course in this day and age,that philosophy probably won't go over real well.
But I bet it would be effective.







 
0

log in

join