Reply With Quote
Fair statements. I will return the courtesy. Sorry for being an ass.
IMO, 9/11 exposed a vulnerability we will ALWAYS have. Any country in the world that lives with any degree of freedom will ALWAYS be vulnerable.
The only way to truly guarantee our safety is to give up "some" freedoms.
So far, we havent had to do that (yet). Sure, theres the Patriot Act, the DHS, new security in air travel, but ultimately, Im not less free than before.
But what happens when (inevitably) the radicals attack again?
Its going to happen. It will absolutely happen again.
Are we going to start another war? Start a new Federal agency? Give more power to existing Federal agencies? Limit out of country travel? Limited movement within the States?
Where does it end?!
Terrorism can not be eradicated. Let me re-state that....
Terrorism can not be eradicated by any palpable means.
Iraq is doing nothing for the cause. Some try to pass it off as "we're fighting them there, so we dont have to here". Thats called a line of Bull .
Last time I checked, I wasnt being vigilant outside my house with my rifle looking for terrorists. Nor were the police, nor was the military, nor was anyone (Intelligence agencies were/are).
My point is, our government does not have clean hands. We trifle in world matters to our advantage. Am I sorry? no! them.
But there is a byproduct of meddling in other countries, financially/militarily supporting an entire region's sworn enemy (Islam vs Israel), etc etc.
These are those drawbacks, and the only thing that could eradicate terrorism is to eradicate the entire middle east of all life that uses lungs to oxygenate their blood.
Otherwise, youre just poking your caged enemy with a stick.
My opinion anyway.
You said "rough comparison". I'd call it "analogy with no relation". But thats me.As a rough comparison....
We had been lightly engaged in WWII for some time before Dec 7, 1941, but it was that day "that lived in infamy" and pushed us fully into the conflict. Similarly, we had been dealing with terrorism and radical Islamist groups like al-Queda with minimal effort and success, but when those towers fell, it pushed us into a full-scale offensive.
WW2 and the War on Terror are not even remotely similar. Not in scale, not in capability and certainly not in threat.
Hitler/Axis powers could have/would have taken over the world. They had the means, the logistics and the initiative to do it.
Islamic terrorism isnt bent on world domination. Even if it were, they dont have the means, the logistics or the initiative.
They want the West to "Go away" from their lands. They want the Persian empire in its totality to live under Shira Law and use the Quaran as its Cons ution. They want Jerusalem back. They want Israel and its people dead.
They dont want to take and hold New York. They couldnt even if they wanted to.
So, WW2 and the WoT couldnt be more dissimilar.
I equate the War on Terror to the War on Drugs more than I do any other war.
Both have a moving target for an objective.
Both targets are vague and ever-changing in their definition.
Both require an unorthodox approach to the battlefield.
Put it this way...
The US is not as serious about Terrorism as you are lead to believe. Again, the hijackers were Saudi. You think the US is going to attack Saudi Arabia? Or even threaten sanctions? These are the same people who demand there be no women on the tarmac when their plane lands on US soil.
They dont respect us, they dont even fear us. We buy something to the tune of 80% of SA's total oil production. Should the US jeopardize that influx by actually combatting the Saudi's on terrorism? We already have the answer....on 9/11, Saudi royalty was here in America, their flight was the only flight allowed out of America that day.
Do you see where the US' interests actually lie? Not in its people, or our security, but with foreign trade interest.
So youre asking me to stomach a government that puts its foreign relations above the interests of its own people, and in the same breath, asking me to trust that same government in its decisons in a global war they have no real intention of winning?
No ing way.
You already know where those people on 9/11 came from. Yet, we still hang out with Saudi's in the foreign arena. The Saudi's have done nothing to root out their internal problems of radical Islam and its just a matter of time before one their own do it again.So we got off track....yes that was a mistake. But, that doesn't change the fact that al-Queda and radical Islamist terror tactics still exist and need to be dealt with strongly.
What do you think the US' response will be this time? Different? I sincerely doubt it.
The American government has no interest in winning a War on Terrorism. Their only interest is the ability to sustain it....at all costs.
Dont be surprised when the WoT starts to break this country financially by direct (military support overseas, loss of life, etc) and indirect (the DHS, homeland monitoring, intelligence agencies) expense that the People will tire of its cost.
Only to be hit again by terrorists, rejustifying the financial collapse. You call it vigilance, I call it ignorance.
You want to win this war? Good, because your government doesnt. Yet you trust them with your security. That sir, is beyond my comprehension.
