These Military Vets Have Found A Smarter Way To Fight The War On Terror

Discussion in 'Terrorism' started by Derideo_Te, May 30, 2017.

  1. Derideo_Te

    Derideo_Te Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Oct 3, 2015
    Messages:
    41,790
    Likes Received:
    32,959
    Trophy Points:
    113
    This is a follow up thread to my other thread about the US MIlitary only having a 7% chance of defeating ISIS.

    http://www.politicalforum.com/index...only-has-a-7-chance-of-defeating-isis.433088/

    Apparently there is a very small segment of the US Military that now understands the problem and is switching to more effective means than just guns and bombs to defeat terrorism.

    http://www.huffingtonpost.co.za/entry/war-on-terror-smart-power-veterans_us_5925a378e4b0ec129d316c5f


    Now comes the real kicker!

    The ONLY way to defeat terrorism is to go after their resources. Just killing them doesn't work because that makes them martyrs for their cause. Without cutting off the root of the problem it is NEVER going to be solved.

    In my opinion if a mere 5% of the US military budget was dedicated to these kinds of problems, a mere $30 billion or so, terrorism would no longer be a threat in a decade and effectively 95% eliminated in two decades without new recruits.

    Time to listen to these battle hardened vets and contact your Congressional Representatives and tell them to make this a PRIORITY for the sake of the lives and limbs of our finest men and women in uniform.

    This is a NONPARTISAN issue. Nothing whatsoever to do with who is in charge.

    This is about doing what is RIGHT for AMERICA and We the People.

    Please make the calls!

    TYIA
     
  2. xAWACr

    xAWACr Member

    Joined:
    Jun 11, 2011
    Messages:
    626
    Likes Received:
    11
    Trophy Points:
    18
    What, exactly, does "go after their resources" mean?
     
  3. APACHERAT

    APACHERAT Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Jun 23, 2013
    Messages:
    38,029
    Likes Received:
    16,040
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    The real kicker being the source is the Huffington Post... :roflol:
     
    Mushroom likes this.
  4. vman12

    vman12 Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Jun 25, 2015
    Messages:
    58,230
    Likes Received:
    39,036
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Basically he's saying that these people they're recruiting are on the bottom level of the hierarchy of needs.

    They join terrorist groups for the same reasons people join gangs, and that's really what ISIS and extremists are: violent gang members.

    Provide basic resources and you not only remove the desperation that initially drives them to join, but you also get the added benefit of them hopefully being grateful to the US.

    The problem with this, imho, is that the religious and cultural norms of the ME makes this largely problematic, if not impossible to do.

    If forced to choose between a helpful infidel and a rampaging ISIS, their religion demands the latter choice.
     
    Battle3 likes this.
  5. Derideo_Te

    Derideo_Te Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Oct 3, 2015
    Messages:
    41,790
    Likes Received:
    32,959
    Trophy Points:
    113
    There are two parts to resources.

    First is equipment and funding. That is relatively straightforward and has already been put in place.

    The second is recruits and training. Without new recruits the terrorist organizations will disappear over time. The OP article focuses on denying terrorists new recruits which is the most effective means of stopping terrorism.

    The problem is that the supply of new recruits depends upon the amount of poverty that makes people desperate for an alternative. In order to remove that desperation you need to lift them out of the abject poverty that causes their desperation.

    It is more humane and way less expensive to help people out of poverty than it is to kill them after they have become terrorists.
     
    Mr_Truth and Bowerbird like this.
  6. Derideo_Te

    Derideo_Te Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Oct 3, 2015
    Messages:
    41,790
    Likes Received:
    32,959
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Why am I not surprised that you would try to deflect from the topic with mindless partisan inanities?
     
  7. Derideo_Te

    Derideo_Te Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Oct 3, 2015
    Messages:
    41,790
    Likes Received:
    32,959
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Which is an assumption that does not apply in reality.

    To put this in the simplest of terms someone with nothing has nothing to lose so a promise is better than nothing.

    Alternatively if that person is provided with a means of earning a living and supporting their family now they have to make a choice between doing what is right for themselves and their family or throwing it all away on a "promise" that may or may not be real.

    Not everyone in the ME is a fundamentalist believer. Furthermore recruits are coming from places other than the ME.
     
    Mr_Truth and Bowerbird like this.
  8. cerberus

    cerberus Banned Donor

    Joined:
    Sep 17, 2015
    Messages:
    25,552
    Likes Received:
    5,363
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Can somebody please tell this idiot it only costs a few dollars to make IEDs and cause devastating carnage with them when placed strategically (as witness the explosion in Kabul this morning??). :roll: Terrorists don't need very much in the way of 'resources' to accomplish that? Who are these fools who presume to govern us.
     
  9. Derideo_Te

    Derideo_Te Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Oct 3, 2015
    Messages:
    41,790
    Likes Received:
    32,959
    Trophy Points:
    113
    If there is no terrorist to make an IED in the first place, what happens?

    Try reading the entire link first before responding again, m'kay?
     
    Mr_Truth and Bowerbird like this.
  10. cerberus

    cerberus Banned Donor

    Joined:
    Sep 17, 2015
    Messages:
    25,552
    Likes Received:
    5,363
    Trophy Points:
    113
    I'm simply making the observation that there's no way of eradicating terrorism because it can thrive on minimal resources, so there will always be enough of them around to wreak havoc for almost zero cost??
     
  11. Derideo_Te

    Derideo_Te Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Oct 3, 2015
    Messages:
    41,790
    Likes Received:
    32,959
    Trophy Points:
    113
    What we have today is rampant terrorism as a result of militarising them instead of treating them like the criminals that they are in reality.

    Militant terrorism of the kind that we see today in ISIS needs to be defeated by eliminating their primary resources because they cannot be defeated by using conventional military means as per my other thread.

    Individual acts of terrorism, such as you are referring to, are the acts of criminals and need to be handled by law enforcement not the military.

    No, terrorism can never be completed eradicated but the topic is militant terrorism which can be defeated provided it is dealt with in a sane and rational manner rather than a kneejerk response of throwing troops and guns at the problem without any understanding of the "war" and how it must be waged in order to win it.

    As Sun Tsu explained you never fight on the battleground if your enemy's choosing because that means you will lose. And he also said that if you can defeat your enemy without fighting that is the preferred option.

    No amount of guns can kill an idea but it is possible to change someone's mind when you alter their frame of reference.
     
    Mr_Truth likes this.
  12. cerberus

    cerberus Banned Donor

    Joined:
    Sep 17, 2015
    Messages:
    25,552
    Likes Received:
    5,363
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Well maybe Sun Tsu didn't give much thought to the fact that our enemy isn't a conventional enemy, and one not given to negotiating nor rational discussion? I get that 'not fighting is the preferred option' because it means there will be no casualties on either side. The other aspect is that our so-called leaders can't bring themselves to think of this as a war, therefore are not waging war against the jihadists as an enemy but merely seeking to contain them or propiriate them. Despite all the spin I actually the believe the Manchester bomber, who ten years ago was reported to the police, wasn't reported for minor stuff like shoplifting and receiving stolen goods, he was reported for terrorist persuasions. But as per usual the police didn't do anything about it.
     
  13. Derideo_Te

    Derideo_Te Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Oct 3, 2015
    Messages:
    41,790
    Likes Received:
    32,959
    Trophy Points:
    113
    The problem for living in a society that respects individual rights is that you do have a right to have "terrorist persuasions" as long as you don't act upon them. Law enforcement does have an obligation to investigate such individuals to see if they have committed any crimes but if they haven't they are free to go. If you want a police state to keep tabs on people like that then you are giving up your own rights. Are you willing to do so?
     
    Mr_Truth likes this.
  14. vman12

    vman12 Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Jun 25, 2015
    Messages:
    58,230
    Likes Received:
    39,036
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Where did the people who attacked multiple targets in France hide?

    You know, the Muslims who were born and raised in France and Belgium.
     
  15. Derideo_Te

    Derideo_Te Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Oct 3, 2015
    Messages:
    41,790
    Likes Received:
    32,959
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Were they affluent, middle class or poor?
     
    Mr_Truth and Bowerbird like this.
  16. Strasser

    Strasser Banned

    Joined:
    May 6, 2012
    Messages:
    4,219
    Likes Received:
    526
    Trophy Points:
    113
    In the past there was no need to go through all that trouble of 'vetting' individuals; villages, towns, and cities that refused to surrender to besieging armies were simply burned to the ground, and most laws made entire communities responsible for the behaviors of its troublemakers. The ME legal systems call for tearing down the family of a criminal or terrorist's entire house and expelling them, for instance. It's a relatively new to run around defending genocidal vermin political ideologies because of 'rights n stuff'.
     
  17. vman12

    vman12 Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Jun 25, 2015
    Messages:
    58,230
    Likes Received:
    39,036
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Does that matter? Bin Laden was affluent after all.

    Many, if not most, of the terror leaders have deep pockets.
     
    Strasser likes this.
  18. xAWACr

    xAWACr Member

    Joined:
    Jun 11, 2011
    Messages:
    626
    Likes Received:
    11
    Trophy Points:
    18
    You must be too young to have noticed, but we have been trying to "lift people out of poverty" right here in the US for the last half-century and guess what? It's been an epic FAIL:

    https://poverty.ucdavis.edu/faq/what-current-poverty-rate-united-states

    So what makes you believe we can do it over there? And if you're so certain that it will be "way less expensive", how about some actual numbers that back that up?
     
  19. cerberus

    cerberus Banned Donor

    Joined:
    Sep 17, 2015
    Messages:
    25,552
    Likes Received:
    5,363
    Trophy Points:
    113
    You mean 'free to go' then carry on planning the atrocity until it becomes convenient for them to act on it? You see, that's why they'll win this war - because of our preposterous goody-two-shoes sense of judicial fair play which leaves us and our families sitting ducks. I don't want a police state but I'm afraid that in order to prevail, we need one, then when we have prevailed we return to the status quo ante. Guilty until proven innocent, otherwise they have us by the short and curlies.
     
    Strasser likes this.
  20. cerberus

    cerberus Banned Donor

    Joined:
    Sep 17, 2015
    Messages:
    25,552
    Likes Received:
    5,363
    Trophy Points:
    113
    And plenty of sponsors to fill them. They're much more clever than we, in our western arrogance, think
     
    Last edited: Jun 1, 2017
  21. Strasser

    Strasser Banned

    Joined:
    May 6, 2012
    Messages:
    4,219
    Likes Received:
    526
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Indeed.

    Re the bolded, a 'police state' isn't necessary just a common sense approach to immigration, that's all. There are a couple dozen Islamo-Nazi countries these fake 'refugees' can immigrate to, no reason for the western countries to pander to them and their atavistic nonsense.
     
  22. Strasser

    Strasser Banned

    Joined:
    May 6, 2012
    Messages:
    4,219
    Likes Received:
    526
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Merely increasing minimum wage to reflect real inflation would go a long way to alleviating much of it, along with other common sense economic policies. Right wing ideological economic fantasies aren't any great success story, either.
     
    Gorgeous George likes this.
  23. Derideo_Te

    Derideo_Te Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Oct 3, 2015
    Messages:
    41,790
    Likes Received:
    32,959
    Trophy Points:
    113
    But we are not talking about the leaders. We are discussing the RECRUITS.

    So answer the question, are those recruits affluent, middle class or poor?
     
  24. Derideo_Te

    Derideo_Te Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Oct 3, 2015
    Messages:
    41,790
    Likes Received:
    32,959
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Actually the reduction in poverty in this nation was reduced if from over 20% to below 15% according to the link that you provided.

    [​IMG]

    The current US military budget is over $600 billion per year and it can't defeat terrorism.

    The OP outlines programs and costs already. I recommend that you try reading it.
     
  25. Derideo_Te

    Derideo_Te Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Oct 3, 2015
    Messages:
    41,790
    Likes Received:
    32,959
    Trophy Points:
    113
    So you are willing to have the government spying on everything that you do all of the time because you are "guilty until proven innocent", right?
     

Share This Page