Goals in the War on Terrorism

[jourgenson]

I would like to hear what people think should be the goals of the "War on Terrorism."

Is it to bring Osam to justice? And his cohorts?

Remove the Taliban from power? Syria? Iraq?

Palestine?

What should the coalition do? When do they stop?

 

[BRiT]

They should not stop until all evil is removed.

--|BRiT|

 

[Prox]

Originally posted by BRiT
They should not stop until all evil is removed.

--|BRiT|

Part of me wants to agree with this, but then I ask myself is this possible. I dont think so, and so I believe that more realistic goals should be set. The number one goal should be to get rid of our buddy osama. And then I think that from what Ive heard the taliban should be no more. After that I dont think that there is anything that we could do. I dont think that we should go and attack any country that we believe might be harboring terrorists. I mean I dont think that we should be playing the role of government maker, and telling different countries that their government is no good and they have to do it our way. The only reason that i support the removal of the taliban is because they are not a recognized government by most of the world. Anyway I hope these ramblings made at least a little sense.

 

[JHowse]

I have to disagree, Prox. We should strike ALL terrorists and those who harbor them. I know it's gonna be a long affair to handle all of this, but I would definitely consider dealing with Iraq, Syria, and Palestine as high priority nations harboring terrorists. Of course, the best approach is divide and conquer...meaning...take one country/terrorist group out at a time. Prox, a government who supports terrorism is not a government this world needs. I agree that we shouldn't install puppet governments, but perhaps let a fair coalition of the people inside their country decide their own fate.

 

[SwissSmiss]

Originally posted by BRiT
They should not stop until all evil is removed.

--|BRiT|

::removes BRiT::

All evil has been removed. :bgrin: :lol2:

umm, for a serious answer... i think something should just be done to Osama and his "cohorts." (i love that word, mj). it's not like we can do much else morally is what i see.

 

[jadedskies]

I agree with pretty much all JH said, with the exception of puppet governments, which I think we should install, but that's another story. Which is why I'm wondering why the U.S. is taking so long. Turkish troops are lining up on the border with Iraqi Kurdistan. Israel's troops are as we speak going after terrorists in Palestine. I'm hoping that Bush will go the whole hog and take on all of these regimes. To remove the likes of Bashar Assad, Saddam Hussein and Yasser Arafat from office would make the world a lot safer place. But we'll see. Has he got the guts to finish the job or hasn't he?

 

[JHowse]

I agree that Bush should take out these regimes, but I still maintain that puppet governments are bad in the sense that they would not necessarily work for the best interests of the peoples they would govern even if they consider american needs. I think that we should supervise the process that is used in establishing new governments for those nations, but the people of those nations should ultimately choose their government. In doing so, you hopefully gain the support of the populace of those nations. Of course, this works in theory....that is why we would be there to "guide" them along, if necessary...

The other alternative is to finally develop alternative fuel sources and completely lose dependence on mid east oil....hmmmm...that's an idea, too.

 

[jadedskies]

Originally posted by JHowse
I agree that Bush should take out these regimes, but I still maintain that puppet governments are bad in the sense that they would not necessarily work for the best interests of the peoples they would govern even if they consider american needs. I think that we should supervise the process that is used in establishing new governments for those nations, but the people of those nations should ultimately choose their government. In doing so, you hopefully gain the support of the populace of those nations. Of course, this works in theory....that is why we would be there to "guide" them along, if necessary...

Yeah, that's not a bad idea.
Do you think it's going to happen though? Is the U.S. government willing to put lives on the line to get this done?

Originally posted by JHowse
The other alternative is to finally develop alternative fuel sources and completely lose dependence on mid east oil....hmmmm...that's an idea, too.

That's not much of an idea. What about the poor citizens of the Middle East, who still have to live under these regimes?

 

[Prox]

As much as I hate terrorism, I really dont see how we can go in and pick out the terrorists, and not hurt the country as a whole. I mean how do we plan on taking out these governments. Are we just gonna go into Iraq, and blow the hell out of our best friend sadam, and those in iran etc. I dont know how this will work. I am completly in support of the "war on terrorism" I just have a hard time trying to grasp where it should go, and to what extent we should get involved in other countries. I mean if we are attacking one country because they dont have the best record with human rights and things like that, how long till we are at war with china, which could mean nuclear, and no one wants that. If we are gonna do this, I really think it needs to be done right, which means going all the way, but I also think that we should use caution and not get carried away.

 

[jadedskies]

Originally posted by Prox
As much as I hate terrorism, I really dont see how we can go in and pick out the terrorists, and not hurt the country as a whole. I mean how do we plan on taking out these governments. Are we just gonna go into Iraq, and blow the hell out of our best friend sadam, and those in iran etc. I dont know how this will work. I am completly in support of the "war on terrorism" I just have a hard time trying to grasp where it should go, and to what extent we should get involved in other countries. I mean if we are attacking one country because they dont have the best record with human rights and things like that, how long till we are at war with china, which could mean nuclear, and no one wants that. If we are gonna do this, I really think it needs to be done right, which means going all the way, but I also think that we should use caution and not get carried away.

How long until we're at war with China? Maybe not officially, but there ARE Chinese troops fighting alongside the Taliban as we speak. Remember when special forces knocked off that Bin Laden lieutenant? Several Chinese soldiers escorting him were knocked off at the same time. It won't turn nuclear, because no one has anything to gain from using nuclear weapons. The China-Taliban alliance won't last song - a Muslim-Communist alliance? By virtue of that, it's not going to be the strongest alliance. The Arab world has had this coming for ages. It's about time something was done about it.