Quote:
Originally posted by John D Harris:
quote: Originally posted by Skunk:
Personally, I consider asking the question "why do the terrorists want to attack the US?" and seriously addressing the answer as a far more effective (and cheap) way of tackling terrorism.
|
By who's standard's is it more effective? or Cheap? I can see from the forgien National traveling to the USA it would be cheap, after all they wouldn't have to do much. But the elected officals here have decided it is NOT cheap to follow that route. Effective? What are we to do change our life style, goverment policies, to suit everybody? Exactly how is that more effective? for everygroup that we have to change for there is another group that will be unhappy and we'll have to change back to satisfy them. Or is there some that are more deserving then others and they are they only ones we have to change for? Personaly I don't find running around chasing my rear end to be to effective, but to each his own I guess. [/QUOTE]Addressing grievances (real or imagined) does not mean changing life-style or giving up freedoms - cetainly you would not have suffered anything like the loss of freedom that you have under Patriot I & II. Looking at the root causes is certainly cheaper than waging and $80billion+ war that has not (in any way at all) reduced terrorism - but instead has INCREASED anti-American feeling (even amongst the populaces of countries that formerally felt themselves to be natural allies).
Right now, all that the US government is doing IS running around chasing its rear. Fighting off insurgents in Afghanistan and Iraq (with a daily death toll and high casualty list), sending back planes because the
surnames of one or two passengers match
suspected terrorists, and entering into diplomatic circles and discovering that former allies are now suspicious of it and are only willing to play ball in exchange for huge concessions. Meanwhile, the economy is failing, the boycott of US goods is rising, businesses are finding it more and more difficult to trade outside of the US as a result of a host of anti-terrorism legislation (not to mention the new visa restrictions to help the US tourism industry to shed jobs and deter foreign business travellers to invest in the US) and we are seeing lifestyle changes that could hardly be described as either pleasant or logical.
Consider how Chirac once served in the French army fighting the Algerians, how the Algerians hated France and planted terrorist bombs on the streets of French cities. Consider how today, after years of
peaceful dialogue and admitting faults where they were due recently led to this ex-member of the most HATED army of occupationto be CHEERED by crowds of adulating Algerians on a recent visit to the country by Chirac. All this without
any changes in French lifestyle. No more bombs, no more Algerian terrorists, just friendship and peaceful (and profitable) trade relations. It can be achieved - but not with a gun.
One bullet always leads to another, until one of the opponents are dead. And unless we are planning the genocide of every citizen of every non-US allied country, we will be fighting a perpetual and expensive war FOREVER - with all of the loss of freedom and changes in lifestyle that such a war suggests.