How do we decide we have "Won" the war on terrorism?

[John/az2]

How can we possibly know when we have won the war on terrorism?

By what criteria will it be judged?

Will standards relax after the declaration of the "victory"?

Will restrictive legislation (that is sure to be passed) be recalled?

I'm afraid (as I have said earlier) that this "war" will end up being the twin sister to the WOsD (War on some Drugs).

I'm also afraid that the banking industry in it's "effort" to do its part will re-introduce it's "know-your-customer" regulations. After-all we must know where all the money is going, the spending and deposit habits of the people must be tracked and tabulated, and cash must be made more inconvenient than "the card".

My confidence in this "war" is waning, but was never strong to begin with.

The enemy is invisible, its goals are not necessarily conquest, but destruction of confidence and morale, and the promotion of fear.

It hides among us and wears our face. It is based upon deep religious beliefs and undying loyalty.

Please, convince what I have said is wrong.

 

[labgrade]

"Please, convince what I have said is wrong."

Wish I could, John. Wish I could.

I haven't felt fuzzy about much of anything since "that day." Feeling less fuzzy the more I hear.

After the OK bombing, we had a new anti-terroist law quickly lashed to the flagpole. Seems it just didn't go quite far enough & look what happens. The new & improved anti-terrorist law/s (so sure to pass that Las Vegas won't make book on it) is just what we need - that & a few good pep talks.

This new war is tailor-made for the spin to be anything anybody with the bully pulpit wants. Makes me think of the "we're at war/no we're not" from 1984. No clear enemy except for the ambiguous "terrorist" which can mean anything one wants.

The stage is set for any infringements on our rights that will "increase the public safety" & "we" will demand that these actions be taken.

Further restrictions on firearms is on its way - the time isn't quite right for that yet though - give 'em time, & time is something they have plenty of.

No restrictions on our freedoms will ever be relaxed.

 

[Art Eatman]

Maybeso when folks stop trying to go spraying lead around the countryside, and stop with the car-bombing and hijackings.

It'll take a mix of stuff to get there. Part of it is just flat-out kill some folks. Some of it is to deny them the money--which won't be easy, nor will "privacy" come to have much meaning.

Some of it will be to mount a PR campaign. Face it, most Afghanis don't know we're spending some $125 million on food and medicine and a whole bunch of "etc." just in this year. Most Moslems don't know that in the Balkans we're keeping non-Moslems from killing Moslems. I don't know the internal structure of Egypt's use of our foreign aid, but I know they get more money than does any other country--but do the fellahin know that?

Some of it will be changes in our foreign policy, to quite meddling in other folks' business just to help out some major corporation of whatever sort: United Fruit (e.g.) in Central America; oil companies in the underbelly of what was the USSR. (and this latter began well before either Bush; it continued through Clinton)

Some of it will entail trying to get new--and friendly--regimes in power in certain countries. However, these regimes must have popular support; they cannot merely be our puppets, kept in place by our military power.

Just remember that as long as the bin Ladens are alive, none of the above "improvements" I mentioned will mean jack-squat. They hate, now; they will always hate. They're as happy to kill a bunch of peaceniks as "Nuke'em!" rednecks; as happy to kill civil libertarians as repressive folks.

It ain't gonna be easy.

Art

 

[labgrade]

Never figured this would be easy & quite frankly, I am willing to pitch in with all the fervor of a nation at war - personal sacrifices - the whole bit. Frankly, I don't see that we have a choice.

I don't expect to see anything along the lines of "stand by for exciting news flash - see our brave boys take down a tango camp live at 11" In many, many aspects, this must be a shadow war & as Bush said, we won't hear of most of the successes. It most certainly will not be "solved" after the last commercial.

This type of war, at the level it must be fought, with all the deceptions required, is something we have never seen.

OK with me.

Besides the realities of the costs (& I'm not talkin' dollars here) that this war will exact, we have a free and open society which will be exploited again & again by our enemies - within & without.
One of my greatest fears is the toll it will take on those very freedoms that this war will be fought to preserve.

I've read many thoughtful & thought-provoking threads here at TFL & many other newsie-type sites, trying to get a grasp of what we are up against & have mostly refrained from making many comments simply because I don't know what to think.

Actions already taken & those in the next few weeks will determine the course of our nation & that of the world for perhaps the next 10 years, if not longer - for better or worse.

I pray they make it count.

 

[CastleBravo]

We will win the war on terrorism at the exact same time we win the war on crime -- never. We won't make it go away completely, and if you expect that we will you need to put down the doobie and come down to Earth. All we can do is keep it down to an acceptably low level by killing off terrorists as we find them. The war on terrorism will end when there are no more people that hate the U.S.A. -- i.e., NEVER.

 

[Gary H]

When every human is dead, terrorism will have been eliminated.

 

[Christopher II]

The war on terrorism will end when there are no more people that hate the U.S.A. -- i.e., NEVER.

Truer words have rarely been spoken.

Methinks we should put a bit of effort into addressing that question before we go off half-cocked and make the problem even worse.

- Chris

 

[scud]

When terrorism = freedom there is only one solution, and we all know how the sheeple feel about that damn freedom.

To be honest I'd rather risk being hit with the ebola virus, botulism, mustard gas, black death, anthrax and a passionate night w/ rosie O and a swimming pool of jello then have even one more stinking law added to the books. If every person except one died because of the terrors of freedom as long as that last person left was free then it would be acceptable to me.

 

[Gary H]

We can all become Moslem. We can change every institution. We can become absolute isolationist, but as long as we are a rich society with social cohesion, we will always have many that hate us. You can not stop these folks from hating us. The only thing that we could do that would stop them would be to launch a full scale nuclear attack upon our country. You need to get over this idea that if we change, people will then stop hating us. We must be poorer than them and so on, before they might not pay attention to us.

We can not make them like us and they endanger our lives and our futures, therefore we must make them fear us.

 

[labgrade]

Excellent! & well said, scud.

I would disagree somewhat (maybe a lot!) re The Night of the Living Rosie - the whorer (sic = no typo) flic to end all. I shudder at the sequel.

Any "counter" I may have is merely that we can (& should) be able & full-willing to have both - our securities and our freedoms.

 

[remedy]

Bush and America declare war on Terrorism. ....Uh oh.

You may be thinking this is a great idea, that Clinton never took terrorism and Islamic extremists seriously with his lame foreign policy, and the now infamous incident of spending 900 million on cruise missles that attacked a camp of empty tents and a pharmeceutical plant in southern Afghanistan.

Well, lets look at the reality of the situation at hand. Here's our track record so far:

War on Drugs = we had more drugs
War on Illiteracy = we had more illiteracy
War on Crime = we had more crime
War on Homelessness = more homeless
War on Child abuse = more abuse
War on Poverty = more poverty
War on School violence = more again
War on Gangs = only getting worse (been to LA or Chicago lately?)

NEED I SAY MORE ???

Lets not forget prohibition either....................................

 

[Gary H]

Your point is well taken and is the reason that these terrorist believe that we are weak and without resolve. We will see. I hope, but won't hold my breath. Colin Powell will try to weaken any response. The public's resolve will begin to fade. That is why times like this demand real leadership. We will see..

 

[Waitone]

Terrorism is nothing new. Its been around for thousands of years. Social programs and group hugs will do nothing to disuade those so inclined to commit terror acts.

Terrorists are economists. They will cease producing their product when the gain is less than their costs. Since suicide types discount their lives, the true cost of their behavior will be born by those they left behind. I am under no illusions as to the moral superiority of America's warriors. They are quite capable of doing bad things for the mother country. Secrecy is necessary for strategic and operational security, but it also is helpful in keeping quiet ugliness.

This war will not end in a traditional sense with a signed piece of paper. It will effectively end when terrorists begin to think it ain't worth the cost to get up and go to work. If Bush does what he says he will do, computer geeks, intel squirrels, gumshoes and pinstripe bankers will do more in the long run to eliminate terrorism than will dog-faced grunts humping it out in the hills of
?stan.

 

[labgrade]

"This war will not end in a traditional sense with a signed piece of paper."

No doubt. Too, it hasn't started with that same "signed piece of paper."

A true declaration would go a ways to allowing me to feel a bit better about this - yes, even with its "war footing" & certain infringements on our liberties.

We have already seen a great deal of the latter - with more to come. If they are serious about this "war," then say so. It is one of those constitutional aspects actually written in the document.

Serious question: how long can Bush be "at war" without further congressional OK?

 

[hkg3]

Have we actually declared "WAR?"

 

[labgrade]

Nope. Actual declaration takes an act of congress.

IIRC & FAIK, we are working under the war powers act which alows the prez to "act accordingly" for some (mumble) amount of time.

If this is war, then declare it as such & quit *****-footin' around.
(standard disclaimer re "different type of war," etc. & "unusual methods .... " )

What's to decide?

 

[David Scott]

This "war" is not the kind that will end with a signed peace treaty, after which everyone goes home and has parades. We'll have to commit to a standing policy of continuous intelligence gathering, and tight-focus preemptive action when the intel warrants it. We're in it for the long haul.

 

[Edward429451]

There will be no winners in this war, only losers, us and them. Since we're walking hand in hand with the US Government now, the reasonable approach in creating a long term defensive stance for America is to allocate 50 billion dollars to the DCM and schools, putting defensive mindset training available to the people at the grassroots level. We'd be unstoppable as a nation, as a nation of warriors.

And then I woke up.

But they'd have to regress the anti-gun propaganda, and that aint gonna happen. "The Card" is coming, folks. For our protection, (and the childrens!). But then as soon as a terrorist steals a card, boards a plane, crashes it or whatever, then you'll be asked if you want (HA!) to carry your card in your hand or forehead!

Now if I could just wake up again.......

No buying, no selling....you're either with em' or against em'
Shades of biblical prophecy.

Pray for our leaders and soldiers.

 

[KSFreeman]

The "War on Terrorism" will be won when the government destroys all of our freedom.

If anyone needs me, I'll be watching CNN to see how we are doing in the War on Drugs and War on Poverty.

 

[John/az2]

Remedy,

Those are exactly my points.

Without universal recognition and restoration of the rights that have been restricted, we don't stand much of a chance of "winning".