Terrorism cannot be defeated by military means.

First it is important to recognize that all people have the same motivations. The population from which the terrorist come have the same hopes and wishes for their future and futures of their children as you and I.

So who are the terrorists?

Terrorist are the 1% of any population. If a group of people are put in a situation where a perceived wrong is being committed against them 80% will do more or less nothing about it. They�ll keep their heads down and try and make the best of it. The remaining 20% are the �activists�. They�ll take action be it political activities, marching in the streets, passive resistance, �subversive� publications etc. Of this activist group a small proportion will be prepared to kill / be killed for �the cause�. The actual percentages vary depending on the magnitude of the perceived wrong.

Why can�t we just kill them?

Who�s them? It�s easy to identify the activist 20% but impossible to identify all of the 1% who will to kill and be killed. The assassination of people who may or may not be terrorists creates martyrs for �the cause� and the numbers of activists and terrorists increase.

Why not intern all of the activists and get the terrorists off the streets that way?

It�s been tried, with disastrous consequences. The imprisonment without trial of a large proportion of a population leads to people who would have remained part of inactive 80% joining the activists and terrorists ranks.

So trying to kill all the terrorists, or imprisoning all the political the activists doesn�t work then?

Nope, just breeds more terrorists and makes those already terrorists more extreme. Of course we must use military force to defend against terror attacks and stop specific threats, but a policy to use military means to defeat terrorists doesn�t work.
However, there is one way and only one way military force can defeat the terrorists. Kill everyone in the population in a grand final solution. Tens of millions dead but hey, no more terrorists�.Or forget trying to find an answer in violence, understand the perceived wrong and try and find some sort of other final solution.

I would like to request this to be concidered for a "Debate". AM/AlecMac I'm hopeing your up to it, but don't concider this a challenge as I'm not really calling anyone out. I just see this thread as a great debate.

AM I agree with you on your statement that
"Terrorism cannot be defeated by military means.", but a Military Occupation is probably the only way of deterence for those/terrorist types of people.

For any other responce from me on this topic will require another debate.



PLEASE William can it?

Originally posted by AlecMac
First it is important to recognize that all people have the same motivations. The population from which the terrorist come have the same hopes and wishes for their future and futures of their children as you and I.

So who are the terrorists?

Terrorist are the 1% of any population. If a group of people are put in a situation where a perceived wrong is being committed against them 80% will do more or less nothing about it. They?ll keep their heads down and try and make the best of it. The remaining 20% are the ?activists?. They?ll take action be it political activities, marching in the streets, passive resistance, ?subversive? publications etc. Of this activist group a small proportion will be prepared to kill / be killed for ?the cause?. The actual percentages vary depending on the magnitude of the perceived wrong.

Why can?t we just kill them?

Who?s them? It?s easy to identify the activist 20% but impossible to identify all of the 1% who will to kill and be killed. The assassination of people who may or may not be terrorists creates martyrs for ?the cause? and the numbers of activists and terrorists increase.

Why not intern all of the activists and get the terrorists off the streets that way?

It?s been tried, with disastrous consequences. The imprisonment without trial of a large proportion of a population leads to people who would have remained part of inactive 80% joining the activists and terrorists ranks.

So trying to kill all the terrorists, or imprisoning all the political the activists doesn?t work then?

Nope, just breeds more terrorists and makes those already terrorists more extreme. Of course we must use military force to defend against terror attacks and stop specific threats, but a policy to use military means to defeat terrorists doesn?t work.
However, there is one way and only one way military force can defeat the terrorists. Kill everyone in the population in a grand final solution. Tens of millions dead but hey, no more terrorists?.Or forget trying to find an answer in violence, understand the perceived wrong and try and find some sort of other final solution.

I think Howard Bloom would disagree.

He surveyed his extensive contacts in the Muslim world recently after being shocked by one of them.

He asked this Muslim source what the Muslim's estimate was of what percentage of all Muslims were Jihadi's or supported the Jihadi's philosophically or with money or other actions of support.

Bloom suggested 10?

The Muslim source said--"OH, NO!"

Bloom expected his Muslim friend to downgrade Blooms guess to 5% or less.

Instead, the Muslim said "70%" . . . or more.

Bloom was shocked.

So, he surveyed his extensive network of Muslim sources. Virtually ALL of them CONFIRMED THE 70% ESTIMATE.

As I understand it, One noted that when 9/11 happened, large groups of Muslims everywhere in the USA virtually 100% cheered energetically, if not wildly.

I think anyone assuming that something other than force will communicate very effectively with such ideologues is dreaming or delusional about the issues. I'd love to be wrong.

from:

www.howardbloom.net...

I disagree. I hate to keep saying "I served in Al-Anbar province" but hey, I did. I've seen the US military deal with terrorists. It can work.

I think it depends if you're prejudiced against the US or the military in general: most people envision US forces going door to door, beating women and dragging men away to Abu Ghraib. That's not how it works.

The US infantryman is no longer some Joe who pulls a trigger and reloads as fast as he can. He's a street cop, he's an aid worker, he's a pollster. He fills the vacuum were there is no Iraqi policeman.

In the aftermath of Falluja, terrorists moved into my sector. We had some terrifying days and yes, civilians were killed in the crossfire. But the firing stopped and eventually life returned to normal. Despite the occasional sniper, VBED or IED attack, my company delivered supplies to mosques for the poor and gave computers to schools. Kids would run along side us as we patrolled the streets. When the terrorists tried to re-infiltrate the city en-masse, the civilians themselves gave us information on who they were and where to catch them. We shut down that last insurgent offensive without any major firefights.

I was stunned by the rebuilding effort in my old sector. In just 6 months most of the families around my FOB added an extra floor to their homes.

Does this mean that all the Iraqis loved us? Of course not. They want us gone as soon as possible. Imams would spew bile and vitriol from their minarets at us. But they key was that the US military had the presence in my sector that enabled us to shut down the terrorist offensives before they gained momentum. Eventually that avoided significant civilian casualties a la Falluja.

What is the alternative, sit back and wait to be attacked again...I think not. I fully support our troops, and luckily the US hasnt had an attack since 2001, Im sure the Muslim terrorists are trying. Id like to see us attack Syria, Saudi Arabia, Iran, and a laundry list of other terrorist harboring nations.