Do You Believe It's Possible to Ever Win The War Against Terrorism?

[Uncle Joe]

Poll question: Do You Believe It's Possible to Ever Win The War Against Terrorism?

If you believe it's possible, please list the necessary circumstances to be met in order to convince you it has been won.

[Mr_Monday]

1. Terrorism is a tactic, not an ideaology.

It's like trying to win a war against Guerrilla Warfare.

[Disturbed]

7. The War on Terror is of course a stupid slogan made up

by a stupid person & kept going by a stupid Pres.

There is a War going on against al Q & the Taliban, which may continue for 50 years or more.

[Donnachaidh]

depends on who is called terrorists

I'm sure some third world countries would look at what we've done in the past and label the US as a terrorist organization. And of course, it's very easy for our government to label anyone who disagrees with them as terrorists.

So no - I doubt anyone in the world could win the battle against that particular word. :shrug:

[Deep13]

2. Three questions and only one chance to respond?

How the hell do I know how to do these things. Don't we have some experts somewhere?

[Uncle Joe]

5. My bad, I forgot about only one chance, I will delete the the other two questions.

[htuttle]

3. You can't win a war against an abstract noun

As Terry Jones already pointed out:
http://www.commondreams.org/views02/0112-02.htm

[MrMickeysMom]

15. Exactly... just like "bombing murder"

Oh, yeah. How ridiculous is this? We're gonna wipe out murder. We're gonna close our little fingers around its dirty little neck and KILL the motha...

Yet, you hear "war on terrah" over and over and over again right alone with that other phrase siting how everything changed after 9-11. It now is common language in places you would never have thought it common- Jim Leher News Hour (when they don't have a 5 person panel discussing religion), from national columnists of the right in your newspaper, from behind the podium from your average dickhead's one minute speech in Congress. It has been infused in the tea blend of our lives.

I'm with ya. Let's correct everybody we can.

[ixion]

16. Yep, Jones and Chomsky and many others

myself included have been saying this. The same goes for the so-called War on Drugs.

There is no such thing as a war against an abstraction.

[shain from kane]

4. The definition keeps shifting.

[HughBeaumont]

6. I'm wondering when the Waronterr is even going to START.

We're not bombing the UAE or the Saudis (the origin of the 19 hijackers). Attacking sovereign nations that did absolutely nothing to harm one American citizen isn't a war on terror. It's an oil grab funded by our tax dollars. This is the worst robbery since S&L in the 80s, and America doesn't even care.

We have no problem torching money in this useless clusterfuck but OH GOD FORBID we suggest some commie program like Universal Health Care!!

[The Velveteen Ocelot]

8. There's no such thing as a "war on terrorism."

Terrorism is a method, not an entity -- and it's been around in some fashion since the beginning of time. You can't have a "war" against a method or tactic like terrorism, although you can wage a war against a perpetrator of terrorism; but even that is problematic because to engage in what we think of as a war you have to have an enemy that is a state or a state-sponsored actor. If the enemy in the "war on terrorism," or even more absurdly, the "war on terror," is instead a loose alliance or collection of groups with an ideological axe to grind (like al Qaeda), how do you conduct a war against them? Why not treat them as what they really are, a criminal enterprise, and ditch all the silly, destructive jargon relating to war? It never made any sense to me.

[kineneb]

9. war on terrorism, war on drugs: both are bogus nt.

[Deep13]

10. I have to agree with most of the other posters here.

War on Terror is a propoganda label. What we can do is minimize terrorism by working to eliminate its causes and with detection and prevention. I view this as primarily a law-enforcement function.

[Tempest]

11. Not as long as countries and governments continue to create terrorists

Through their policies towards nations and their people.

[warren pease]

12. It's by definition impossible...

...since there's no organized army to go to war with, no territory to seize and no governments to topple. As such, it's the perfect replacement for the Cold War -- actually a lot better since it's literally endless -- and provides the rationale for limitless war profiteering, dictatorial policies and enforcement agencies, and 24/7 rallying around the flag for air-tight social control.

And there can be no end because who's to say a 20-year absence of all alleged terrorist activity means the "war" is won. If 20 years goes by and suddenly somebody hijacks a plane or bombs a shopping mall, the "war" gets renewed justification, the citizenry goes bugfuck all over again, flag and decal sales soar and there's always another country to invade.

That's why the "war on terror" is so perfect for the elites, wingnut politicians and their lunatic constituencies, private armies, arms makers, fossil fuels companies and everybody over the rank of captain serving in the armed forces.

And that's why the "war on terror" is so utterly awful for the rest of us. It's phony, it's endless, it's designed to enable dictatorial policies at home and invasions abroad, and it's sucking the soul right out of this country. And then there's the money...


wp

Edited for spling and tpyos

[Dukkha]

13. they are banking on the sheer impossibility of it all

by creating the impossible scenario of the "war on terror" the endless defense spending, unjust military actions, civil liberty suspensions, and corporate war profiteering can go on unabated and indefinite. All they have to do is make the claim "Hey, we are at war so get behind it or we'll lose" and of course the middle America Wal-Martians are gullible enough to buy it.

[JohnLocke]

14. A War against Terrorists, maybe.

A War on Terror is a bumper sticker.

[defendandprotect]

17. it's as phony as the "War on Drugs" and serves the same threatening purpose . . .

imprisonment --- depowering of citizens ---

and at the other end, huge control and profits for those running this corrupt war ---

Drug running cannot go on without cooperation and corruption of government at highest

levels and police enforcement ---


The Drug War is as good as gold in $$$$/power ---