Correctly Framing The Terror Arrests

[K8-EEE]

Proof that "fighting them over there so we don't have to fight them here" is not working.

It is creating more terrorists and squandering our resources. We can't afford that money pit indefinitely and we have only made an Islamic fundamentalist regime and a civil war when we could have been investing in better security, intellegence, etc., because that is the only way you really fight these kind of terrrorist cells.

They are not all in one country so why have a military war in one or two countries. Increased security and containment are the answers; this strategy is why the Clinton years were safer and the Bush era IS THERE TERRORIST ERA. THEY ARE JUST PROMOTING TERRORISM.

[mhatrw]

1. Correctly Framing the Terror Suspects

was beyond the ability of Gonzales when it came to the Miami Seven.

[BOSSHOG]

2. Where in the world is the United States fighting terrorism?

Serious question. We are not fighting terrorism anywhere. Our kids are targets as the Iraqis carry on their civil war. No fighting terrorists there. If we were successful in fighting terrorists would they still be trying to hijack planes? If we stayed the hell out of Iraq and in Afghanistan for the past three years we would have made much greater success in fighting terrorism. Today, conservatives are waving their flags, grabbing their crotches and picking their noses in support of their hero for no apparent reason.

[MrModerate]

3. Here's another: The Terrorists Just Won a Major Battle . . .

Because the new, highly onerous restrictions on air travel (No laptops, no watches, no mp3 players . . . no hand baggage?) will so impede air travel that the costs to compensate will be in the multi-billions. Just when the world can hardly withstand another economic shock, we've been kicked in the teeth.

And they didn't even carry out their plan (that's why they call it "terror," after all -- just a form of fear).

And why aren't we in a position to respond to this new threat intelligently without seriously damaging our economies? Because the Bush administration has squandered every opportunity to oppose terrorist threats becase of its to its stupid, racist, and badly implemented policies.

It's the incompetence, stupid.

[Richard Steele]

4. And these guys were caught by POLICE WORK, not by military action.

[MrModerate]

5. And another frame . . .

This proves once and for all that prevention of terrorist is a security/law enforcement issue and in no reasonable way a military issue. While our military has been busy manufacturing and training terrorists in Iraq, the UK has been beefing up its police approach, and swatting real terrorist cells right and left.

[leftofthedial]

6. Two great frames in this thread

Police work was effective at stopping this "plot."

Military action in Iraq ("fighting them over there") does NOTHING to stop terrorism. In fact, it makes things much worse.

[JAYJDF]

7. I think we all would actually be able to feel safer if the billions spent

on the war were partially spent on beefing up needed security.

[JHB]

8. Here's yet another: It wasn't Delta Force that stopped these guys...

...it was intelligence gathering and investigation -- you know, POLICE WORK!

We know most of what we know about Al Queda because of the much-derided-by-Republicans police work done in investigating and procesuting the East African Embassy bombers. It was FBI agents who almost had some of the 9/11 highjackers. This plot was foiled by Scotland Yard.

Antiterrorism is a "police matter".