How best to deal with Terrorism

[Woe Kitten]

"I don't care. Dead or alive, either way. I mean, I -- it doesn't matter to me. Secondly, I don't know whether we're going to get him tomorrow, or a month from now, or a year from now. I really don't know. But we're going to get him." - George W Bush on bin Laden

Is this the way terrorism should be dealt with?

[Jest@]

Is this the way terrorism should be dealt with?

dear good god no.

The problem with what I argue is that people get self-righteous and patriotic, caught up in their own rhetoric. the best way to deal with terrorism, as with any other problem, is to remove the causes.

As has been argued in a few good books lately, there are understandeable and, in some cases legitimate, reasons for anti-americanism in volatile areas and populations. this is where people jump in and say "terrorist sympathiser!!" - NO. I do not condone these peoples actions - but I can see what their issue is with the US, and I can understand how, in the enviroment they're in (i dont mean religious) they get pushed toward extremism.

The worst way to approach the issue is "these are madmen, brainwashing people into their insane cause!, we must kill and destroy them all!" - bad, bad, bad. Ok, so there's a fair amount of insanity running around in terrorist sectors, granted, but that approach will do no-one any good. All that leats to is a dangerously escalating us-vs-them mentality that leads to both sides claiming moral superiority.

The best way to deal with terrorists is to accept that they are not mad - by and large, terrorist recruits take up their cause having followed a perfectly rational logic (albeit with warped subjective and impressionistic premises). Once you accept this, you ask, what are their reasons? American economic and cultural hegemony, and the idea that the US is actively and selfishly forcing it's way on tyhe rest of the world.

Now, i'm not saying that's wholly true - but it is what is thought. Simply saying "well they're wrong, look at their way of life, they're stupid bigots, the western way is clearly better" commits exactly the same intellectual crime as you accuse them of.

So, what to do from there? Improve the global perception of the US, and the West as a whole for that matter. Now, this isn't just a matter of warm words - there are tangible policy changes to improve the situation.

Ending US/Western international economic hypocrisy would be a start (US/EU continuing farm subsidies and other protectionist policies while forcing other countries to accept totally unfettered trade, governed by Washington-led institutions (IMF/WB), is a) not fair and b) does not go unnoticed in the rest of the world)

End US government cronyism. The degree of nepotism in washington is astounding - the old-boys-network of the Bush administration is only the most noticeable tip of the iceberg. What i mean is, for example, the immediate establishement of incredibly lucrative reconstruction contracts in Iraq with firms who have links to the administration (halliburton etc).

I'm too tired to push my argument to the end, but her'e athe basic summary of the way international thought should be directed: do unto others as you would have tone unto you. Fighting fire with fire will only escalate the problem - as the iraq situation has shown (even the pentagon has been forced to admit that the iraq invasion has increased the threat to the states, and terror-greoup recruitment, hugely). End the gung-ho rhetoiric, and accept that the US may well have done something to understandeably provoke (NOT deserve) the kind of hatred that leads to terrorism.

[Serever]

everyones always saying shit like "OMGz0r terrorists are t3h everywherez!!!11" and that an attack is always likely to happen. BULLSHIT. in the last few years the vast, vast, vast majority of terrorist attacks have been in iraq. by iraqis. outside the middle east, there has been the london train/bus bombings, twin towers and the bali van bomb (as far as i can remember). 3 attacks in 4 years? yea its more than it used to be but its nothing to go apeshit about. i not saying we should just ignore it, but ignoring it would be better than totally raping a few countries.

[Jest@]

there were some other attacks in the SE asia area, and there were the Madrid bombings...but yeh, you have a very good point.


Terrorist attacks are nothing new, post-sept 11th everyone was talking about the 'new' threat of terrorism..in fact, the years since have been pretty average..the only thing that was new about sept. 11th was the location (although it's been tried before) and the scale. there's nothing new about terrorism, the late 2oth century had plenty...IRA, ETA, PFLP, anyone?

the risk of a terrorist attack was by no mean increased after sept 11th - until the invasion of Iraq.

[5eyes]

The days of mass warfare are over and the USA has to realize this. To deal with terrorists we need INTERNATIONAL support and expertly trained Counter-Terrorist teams. There are countless event in the last 50-odd years where terrorists have commited an outrage which was IMPROPERLY dealt with by use of a large force (a la Munich) where a small team of Counter-terrorists could more easily deal with the situation and end it quickly, and most likely with less collateral damage, instead of drawing it out into a 6 month long endevor.

What the international community needs to do is band together and use their forces jointly in order to eliminate terrorist threats. The British SAS, probally currently one of the best and most well-trained counter-terrorists units in the world, the American Delta, well-trained but not nearly as experienced as SAS, Israeli counter-terrorists, who of all are the most experienced with terrorist attacks, Italian frogmen and so-forth should all be ready, willing, and able to cooperativly operate together and be able to deploy anywhere in the world in under 24 hours, and probably should be much less time than that, to take out terrorist threats.

All terrorists, unless they have incredibly valuable information, should be killed on spot. There are way to many instances in history where a country (like France) would release terrorists to try to gain the favor of those terrorists, which usually end up getting the country attacked again anyways. Also terrorists kept in prisons invite more terrorist attacks to get those imprisioned terrorists out.

And also all Americans have to come to realize that the terrorists declared this war on us decades ago and will not stop untill they have either accomplished what they set out to do, or untill they have all been eliminated. I AM NOT TALKING ABOUT GENOCIDE OF ARABIC PEOPLE OR ANY BULL LIKE THAT, terrorists come from all over the world, of all diffrent nationalities, but they band together with the single fact of them all that they are addicted to killing and all are set on destroying the world for the rest of us. Only genocide I speak of is that of those hell-bent on the genocide of the entire planet...

[Spartan]

DS agents are probably the most badass people I've seen.

[shaun_amos]

but they band together with the single fact of them all that they are addicted to killing and all are set on destroying the world for the rest of us.

i just want to point out that that statement is incredibly invalid, and I think what Jest@ said is a damn good point, we must remove the causes of terrorism. instead of believing the "terrorists hate freedom and democracy, they dont like cookies and they eat kittens" propaganda

so to fight terrorism we must fight a much more indirect fight, the fight against global exploitation, im not going to get into said exploits but believe it or not, capitalism has created many situations that foster the growth of exploitation.
now im not going to say that to end terrorism get rid of capitalism, though I think this planet could make some improvements with an alternative social system.

terrorists are not addicted to killing, and do not want to bring about world war 3, for the most part, terrorist organizations are born out of extreme conditions when there is a direct opposition (real or imagined) preventing them from achieving what they believe will be better for society.

and remember boys and girls, capitalist democracy, is not the only system available to us.

[Woe Kitten]

The days of mass warfare are over and the USA has to realize this. To deal with terrorists we need INTERNATIONAL support and expertly trained Counter-Terrorist teams. There are countless event in the last 50-odd years where terrorists have commited an outrage which was IMPROPERLY dealt with by use of a large force (a la Munich) where a small team of Counter-terrorists could more easily deal with the situation and end it quickly, and most likely with less collateral damage, instead of drawing it out into a 6 month long endevor.

What the international community needs to do is band together and use their forces jointly in order to eliminate terrorist threats. The British SAS, probally currently one of the best and most well-trained counter-terrorists units in the world, the American Delta, well-trained but not nearly as experienced as SAS, Israeli counter-terrorists, who of all are the most experienced with terrorist attacks, Italian frogmen and so-forth should all be ready, willing, and able to cooperativly operate together and be able to deploy anywhere in the world in under 24 hours, and probably should be much less time than that, to take out terrorist threats.

All terrorists, unless they have incredibly valuable information, should be killed on spot. There are way to many instances in history where a country (like France) would release terrorists to try to gain the favor of those terrorists, which usually end up getting the country attacked again anyways. Also terrorists kept in prisons invite more terrorist attacks to get those imprisioned terrorists out.

And also all Americans have to come to realize that the terrorists declared this war on us decades ago and will not stop untill they have either accomplished what they set out to do, or untill they have all been eliminated. I AM NOT TALKING ABOUT GENOCIDE OF ARABIC PEOPLE OR ANY BULL LIKE THAT, terrorists come from all over the world, of all diffrent nationalities, but they band together with the single fact of them all that they are addicted to killing and all are set on destroying the world for the rest of us. Only genocide I speak of is that of those hell-bent on the genocide of the entire planet...

Is it just me, or does the above statement make anyone else afraid to bring children into this world? I feel sick...

[5eyes]

Is it just me, or does the above statement make anyone else afraid to bring children into this world? I feel sick...

err... sorry about that... and if that made you sick you may want to hold off reading what I'm about to write...



As to shaun_amos you must realize that those who kill begin to enjoy killing, they enjoy the rush they get from the adreniline that their bodies give them when in a desperate situation. Its the same as in sports, video games, even sex, you get an adreiline shot from your glands that speed up your heartrate and excite you.

Take murderers/rapists for example. If you hear the testimony of some of these people you say to youself that the person is sick, the person talks about how they ENJOYED killing someone. They get PLEASURE from killing people. Thats what happens with terrorists, they usually begin their careers on a basis of relgion or belief or revenge, but even after getting revenge, defeating what-ever endangered their religion or beliefs, they become addicted to what they were doing. They then start commiting outrages for the pure fact of commiting them, getting the worlds attension, and getting that rush they desire, like cocaine addicts waiting to get their hands on the next bag.

As to your comments on current social organization, what would YOU suggest as opposed to capitalism?

DS agents are probably the most badass people I've seen.

Honestly, I dont know who the DS agents are, but I did forget to mention the German GSG9 as one of the more major counter-terrorist units.

[Caste]

DS agents are probably the most badass people I've seen.

you want badass, you goto the Spetsnaz
They storm a building, capture a terrorist, take him outside, and behead him in front of terrorists in another building.
Yeah.



5eyes, I think you're really seeing this world as a Black and White situation, when it isn't. Terrorists aren't some incarnation of Satan, non-humans bent on destroying everything. They have messages they're trying to get across. Of course they hate people, who doesn't? But their on the fanatical side of hate (kill all Jews! LULULULUL). At the end of the day, most of them go home to families, eat supper, watch TV, etc.

[Woe Kitten]

As to shaun_amos you must realize that those who kill begin to enjoy killing, they enjoy the rush they get from the adreniline that their bodies give them when in a desperate situation.

Am I right in thinking that you believe that George Bush and your Armed services enjoy killing? If you take the above premise as granted then it seems you can't avoid that position. If so the Iraqi people are in grave danger.

Take murderers/rapists for example. If you hear the testimony of some of these people you say to youself that the person is sick, the person talks about how they ENJOYED killing someone. They get PLEASURE from killing people. Thats what happens with terrorists, they usually begin their careers on a basis of relgion or belief or revenge, but even after getting revenge, defeating what-ever endangered their religion or beliefs, they become addicted to what they were doing. They then start commiting outrages for the pure fact of commiting them, getting the worlds attension, and getting that rush they desire, like cocaine addicts waiting to get their hands on the next bag.

- Not everyone who kills enjoys it or everyone would be doing it, most people that commit murder are overcome with extreme mysery and self loathing as a result
- Any person that acts in any way has a justification for their actions, we may not think their justification is valid. However, this is irrelevant, the only way to stop someone acting on justifications they believe in is to show that their justification is false (either that or you can kill them). In the case of terrorists, the atrocities commited by the west ARE the justification. So if we kill terrorists, we only REINFORCE their justification. Therefore, every terrorist we kill makes terrorism a bigger problem.
- If terrorists killed only because they like killing they would do it themselves. Osama bin Laden doesn't plant the bombs himself.

As to your comments on current social organization, what would YOU suggest as opposed to capitalism?

My short answer as a political philosopher would have to be democracy and socially aware capitalism.

But since your clearly going to start babling on about US democracy being the pride and joy of the human race: I think I'll have to ellaborate.

When Democracy first came about as a political system in ancient Greece, the word "Demos" from which its name is derived had a meaning roughly equivalent to the modern word "mob". So democracy originally meant "rule by the mob". Now when the ancient Greeks used it, neither women nor non-citisens could participate. This created a fatal flaw in their democracies. However, the male citisens of Classical Greece could ALL sit in the senate of their own city state. In fact, they were actually paid to do so. Another thing that worked about their Democracies were the small scale upon which they existed. The 'States' of ancient Greece were roughly equivalent to large towns in the modern era. So to emulate that system we would be forced to give each borough of London or NY it's own democratically ellected government. To get around this problem, we opted for what are called "representative democracies". These systems are nothing to do with pure democracy, they are compromises between dictatorships and anarchy.

I won't go into anarchy in depth here, because its far to complex an issue and people are pre-programmed by ignorance to reject it without thinking. However, I will point out that anarchy was working very successfully in Spain before Franco took power by force and that the real reason anarchy is virtually gone is because Franco and the Spanish civil war killed most of the anarchist supporters in the first quarter of last century (almost a million of them). I would also like to add that anarchy was never (in political circles at least) the complete ruleless system we now think it is. If you want to know more then feel free to let me know and I'll refer you to some reputable political philosophy text books on the matter (eek I'll probably get locked up in Guantanamo bay for that - wonderful thing American democracy).

Anyway, back to representational democracy. Basically, we ellect representatives and they get a say in the way the country is run. We also elect a single figure who heads the entire country. This is true both in the US and UK. The main reason for this system is that when it was invented it was impossible to have every individual in the country vote on each relevant issue. Obviously in the modern world with ICT as powerful as we now posess this is no longer the case. The elected representatives and the elected head of state are meant to balance out eachother's power by a system called 'seperation of powers'. Basically, the powers of the elected representatives, the head of state and the judiciary (law) are kept seperate, so that each is free from the influence of the other.

Both the US and UK have seen radical erosion of seperation of powers in the last 50-100 years. The main problem is that the Head of State is ALSO the head of the elected representatives. This can lean (as we see in the UK at the moment and under Thatcher) to what are called "elected dictatorships" where a single person controls the entire government of the country. This is a major problem in the UK and a less major, though still dangerous, problem in the US.

However, the main problem in any democracy is education. If we do not fully educate our citisens (those who make up the 'demos' i.e those who vote), then they are incapable of voting effectively. In the US, and to a lesser degree in the UK, our school systems teach a horribly one sided version of history. In the US this is equivalent to the complete brainwashing of a nation that took place under Hitler. In my opinion it is vital that we address this problem. For example, in the Vietnam war, even the president of the US didn't know that the Vietnamese people hated the Chinese even more than they hated the French. Vietnam has had over 1000 years of war with China. The idea of the domino theory taking place under those conditions is rediculous. The leaders of the US are less well informed about the realities of life in Iraq and Latin America than the 'uneducated' peoples of those countries. Surely our leaders should be the best informed people on earth? If we have a stupified population, then they will ellect stupified rulers. It's as simple as that.

I would have loved to go into more detail and follow my point to its conclusion but I'm aware that this post is already WAY longer than any forum post should be. I'd really like to hear your feed back for any of you with attention spans long enough to read it.

[zombie@computer]

The best plan we have against terrorism is removing the reason in can exist. The reason is poverty, the weapon is money. If the USA would use 50% of their militairy budget to fight poverty in the middle east, it would be much safer for both americans and other populations in this world.

[Jest@]

The days of mass warfare are over and the USA has to realize this. To deal with terrorists we need INTERNATIONAL support and expertly trained Counter-Terrorist teams. There are countless event in the last 50-odd years where terrorists have commited an outrage which was IMPROPERLY dealt with by use of a large force (a la Munich) where a small team of Counter-terrorists could more easily deal with the situation and end it quickly, and most likely with less collateral damage, instead of drawing it out into a 6 month long endevor.

What the international community needs to do is band together and use their forces jointly in order to eliminate terrorist threats. The British SAS, probally currently one of the best and most well-trained counter-terrorists units in the world, the American Delta, well-trained but not nearly as experienced as SAS, Israeli counter-terrorists, who of all are the most experienced with terrorist attacks, Italian frogmen and so-forth should all be ready, willing, and able to cooperativly operate together and be able to deploy anywhere in the world in under 24 hours, and probably should be much less time than that, to take out terrorist threats.

All terrorists, unless they have incredibly valuable information, should be killed on spot. There are way to many instances in history where a country (like France) would release terrorists to try to gain the favor of those terrorists, which usually end up getting the country attacked again anyways. Also terrorists kept in prisons invite more terrorist attacks to get those imprisioned terrorists out.

And also all Americans have to come to realize that the terrorists declared this war on us decades ago and will not stop untill they have either accomplished what they set out to do, or untill they have all been eliminated. I AM NOT TALKING ABOUT GENOCIDE OF ARABIC PEOPLE OR ANY BULL LIKE THAT, terrorists come from all over the world, of all diffrent nationalities, but they band together with the single fact of them all that they are addicted to killing and all are set on destroying the world for the rest of us. Only genocide I speak of is that of those hell-bent on the genocide of the entire planet...

ugh. Really. That's disgusting. You insult your own higher brain functions.

"but they band together with the single fact of them all that they are addicted to killing and all are set on destroying the world for the rest of us."

Seriously: take that mentality (not that specific claim, but the kind of thinking behind it), then imagine yourself as a kid growinmg up somewhere in the middle east - that mentality could perfectly well lead to you thinking "Americans, they are hell-bend on their own consumption, they don't give a fuck about the rest of the world, they don't care who's feet they tread on, and they will kill anyone who does not conform to their will, or gets in the way of their greed."

And...it's that exact thought process that becomes the key recruiting seargent for terrorism.

Both statements have a modicum of truth, but have blown themselves out of proportion into some big, black-or-white, they-are-evil-and-worse-than-us mentality. Both are stupid, short-sighted, selfish, ignorant and FUNDAMENTALLY DANGEROUS.

do you really think these people are fundamentally different to us? NO. they have the same brains, the same logical process, the same ability to be influenced by their environment and by the evidence they get. THEY ARE NOT ESSENTIALLY DIFFERENT TO YOU - they just come from a different body of experience. A body of experience that understandeably (not necessarily legitimately) teaches them that you are the bad guy.

Don't fight fire with fire, or assumtion with assumptiuon, or ignorance with ignorance.



Hatred only breeds more hatred, no matter who you think started it. All you can do is remove the reasons to hate or be hated.

[compy905]

I must admit, this is an excellent discussion and I would have to agree that fighting hate with hate does not solve any problems and I as an American citizen, would have to agree that our government should not try to force our system on other countries and that is why we are "hated" around the world.

[Woe Kitten]

The best plan we have against terrorism is removing the reason in can exist. The reason is poverty, the weapon is money. If the USA would use 50% of their militairy budget to fight poverty in the middle east, it would be much safer for both americans and other populations in this world.

Agreed Zombie, but that's unlikely to happen. Luckilly nothing that extreme is required. All the US needs to do is stop supporting Israel disproportionately to the rest of the middle-east and making crazy foreign policy decisions like invading Iraq and Afghanistan. It's not their job to help those countries by charity, only to stop suppressing their development.