How do we end terrorism in the west?
Scroll to see replies
Original post by george_c00per
^^
The only way is to stop them coming in the first place, which means using the Donald Trump approach.
The "War on Terror" is unwinnable.
Original post by oldercon1953
Are you saying that the presence of nukes is not allowing conventional war to be waged so small, hard to detect groups are resorting to horrendous. high profile, actions to gain their objectives?
Being rude to immigrants is causing them to want to cut off the heads of people who know nothing of the offence? You would serve the future of these unfortunates better by telling them, and showing them by example, that they are expected to rise above the offense,, join in the debate, and enjoy their Democracy. Those who cannot make this single accommodation for this most basic civil behavior should be shown no favoritism and whether citizen or not should be immediately deported to a country whose citizens share the same defect.
Being rude to immigrants is causing them to want to cut off the heads of people who know nothing of the offence? You would serve the future of these unfortunates better by telling them, and showing them by example, that they are expected to rise above the offense,, join in the debate, and enjoy their Democracy. Those who cannot make this single accommodation for this most basic civil behavior should be shown no favoritism and whether citizen or not should be immediately deported to a country whose citizens share the same defect.
sorry what?
Original post by Optimum_
West should stop bombing the middle east, why you ask?
Because it's for the middle east to sort out their problem. Yes support their military, yes support them financially, however don't give these terrorist a reason to attack us. Remember, we are at war with ISIS, if we attack them how on earth can we be surprised/shocked when they attack us?
So I reiterate, support middle eastern nations, however do not bomb, do not send troops, do not give these terrorists what they want.
Because it's for the middle east to sort out their problem. Yes support their military, yes support them financially, however don't give these terrorist a reason to attack us. Remember, we are at war with ISIS, if we attack them how on earth can we be surprised/shocked when they attack us?
So I reiterate, support middle eastern nations, however do not bomb, do not send troops, do not give these terrorists what they want.
sincere question- you folks know more than I do about it but, has any country included within the M.E. ever worked out a serious problem with the other nations.
You say to support their military. Do you mean pick a country you like and fund it's military. How do you financially support a sovereign nation.Not sure what you mean here.
As cruel as Isis has been with the pop. of regions they have over-ran, what do you think the chances are that a massive multinational coalition (150 thousand boots-on- the-ground troops), would enjoy widespread acceptance and enough support to weed out ISIS troops from within the population.
If we had the cooperation of the locals in the areas ISIS is concentrated we could quickly sort through whole populations and determine who was friend or foe. This technique was used effectively used in WWll.
The only way ISIS is going to lose it's appeal is if it appears to be totally defeated militarily.
Original post by oldercon1953
sincere question- you folks know more than I do about it but, has any country included within the M.E. ever worked out a serious problem with the other nations.
You say to support their military. Do you mean pick a country you like and fund it's military. How do you financially support a sovereign nation.Not sure what you mean here.
As cruel as Isis has been with the pop. of regions they have over-ran, what do you think the chances are that a massive multinational coalition (150 thousand boots-on- the-ground troops), would enjoy widespread acceptance and enough support to weed out ISIS troops from within the population.
If we had the cooperation of the locals in the areas ISIS is concentrated we could quickly sort through whole populations and determine who was friend or foe. This technique was used effectively used in WWll.
The only way ISIS is going to lose it's appeal is if it appears to be totally defeated militarily.
You say to support their military. Do you mean pick a country you like and fund it's military. How do you financially support a sovereign nation.Not sure what you mean here.
As cruel as Isis has been with the pop. of regions they have over-ran, what do you think the chances are that a massive multinational coalition (150 thousand boots-on- the-ground troops), would enjoy widespread acceptance and enough support to weed out ISIS troops from within the population.
If we had the cooperation of the locals in the areas ISIS is concentrated we could quickly sort through whole populations and determine who was friend or foe. This technique was used effectively used in WWll.
The only way ISIS is going to lose it's appeal is if it appears to be totally defeated militarily.
I sincerely doubt it ISIS is a complex group in its appeal anyway the void that was left behind by the UK and US actions was filled by the next most stable thing religion more importantly religious fanatics. Isis is using the propaganda of West vs Islam to get support. Its no secret that almost every Western country has the capability to destroy ISIS if they were fighting like and organised military, but they arent they are using more gorilla tactics and so bombing them into oblivion only ends up with more collateral damage which only worsens the problem and you end up with a Vietnam. Therefore the way to end the appeal of ISIS is by getting the Muslims in our Western society to condemn them and preach unity with other groups which i know many muslims do. The imams are a very powerful tool in the Muslim community, so the best way to get rid of ISIS is within. Also it helps if other Middle Eastern countries have a stake in the fight as well.
ban assault terrorists
Original post by oldercon1953
sincere question- you folks know more than I do about it but, has any country included within the M.E. ever worked out a serious problem with the other nations.
You say to support their military. Do you mean pick a country you like and fund it's military. How do you financially support a sovereign nation.Not sure what you mean here.
As cruel as Isis has been with the pop. of regions they have over-ran, what do you think the chances are that a massive multinational coalition (150 thousand boots-on- the-ground troops), would enjoy widespread acceptance and enough support to weed out ISIS troops from within the population.
If we had the cooperation of the locals in the areas ISIS is concentrated we could quickly sort through whole populations and determine who was friend or foe. This technique was used effectively used in WWll.
The only way ISIS is going to lose it's appeal is if it appears to be totally defeated militarily.
You say to support their military. Do you mean pick a country you like and fund it's military. How do you financially support a sovereign nation.Not sure what you mean here.
As cruel as Isis has been with the pop. of regions they have over-ran, what do you think the chances are that a massive multinational coalition (150 thousand boots-on- the-ground troops), would enjoy widespread acceptance and enough support to weed out ISIS troops from within the population.
If we had the cooperation of the locals in the areas ISIS is concentrated we could quickly sort through whole populations and determine who was friend or foe. This technique was used effectively used in WWll.
The only way ISIS is going to lose it's appeal is if it appears to be totally defeated militarily.
150,000 boots on the ground is a joke, and nothing like a "massive" multinational coalition. In the first Gulf War, Britain put in 50,000 by itself. The Americans were on well over 500,000. The point about IS is that there is no co-operation with the locals. There's so many different factions and ethnic rivalries, some of these people are ambivalent to IS because the alternatives are just as bad (for them). There's a table somewhere of all the possible factions who could fight IS on the ground, and just about all the possible candidates couldn't do it without sparking off a regional war one way or the other - the only realistic people are the Kurds, who have no interest in doing so as they're only into protecting their own territory - and also don't really have the numbers or resources.
Original post by oldercon1953
If we had the cooperation of the locals in the areas ISIS is concentrated we could quickly sort through whole populations and determine who was friend or foe. This technique was used effectively used in WWll.
If we had the cooperation of the locals in the areas ISIS is concentrated we could quickly sort through whole populations and determine who was friend or foe. This technique was used effectively used in WWll.
I'm not sure when that ever happened in WWII. The more direct parallel is Vietnam, when the French put in hundreds of thousands of troops and abjectly failed - then the Americans put in half a million and that didn't work either.
Original post by Trinculo
I'm not sure when that ever happened in WWII. The more direct parallel is Vietnam, when the French put in hundreds of thousands of troops and abjectly failed - then the Americans put in half a million and that didn't work either.
In WWll , (the Pacific), troops were taught jungle tactics. Troops that fought in Europe were taught urban warfare,(how to clear buildings.) That's how our troops are trained who are going to the M.E.Secure an area and go through it until all combatants are killed or captured.It's easy to understand how having the cooperation of non-combatants in the area to identify the targets would make the task quicker and less destructive.
Given the brutality of ISIS, do you think the local pops. of an area under it's control would care at all about WHO was liberating them? Or that sectarian ties are so strong that they wouldn't cooperate out of fear of starting a civil war. Isn't that pretty much what they had?
If you label each actor and identify their motives, there are almost no parallels to Vietnam. There, the U.S. was trying to liberate a people who gave a fig less from an ideology that they were familiar with and from a foreign Gov. who, while brutal, were far less barbaric than ISIS.
For the most part Americans didn't feel they had any skin in the game in Viet Nam. Not so with ISIS. It's in the entire worlds interests that ISIS be defeated. I'm just looking for a way to do it without killing everything.
(edited 7 years ago)
Original post by Zas_21
I sincerely doubt it ISIS is a complex group in its appeal anyway the void that was left behind by the UK and US actions was filled by the next most stable thing religion more importantly religious fanatics. Isis is using the propaganda of West vs Islam to get support. Its no secret that almost every Western country has the capability to destroy ISIS if they were fighting like and organised military, but they arent they are using more gorilla tactics and so bombing them into oblivion only ends up with more collateral damage which only worsens the problem and you end up with a Vietnam. Therefore the way to end the appeal of ISIS is by getting the Muslims in our Western society to condemn them and preach unity with other groups which i know many muslims do. The imams are a very powerful tool in the Muslim community, so the best way to get rid of ISIS is within. Also it helps if other Middle Eastern countries have a stake in the fight as well.
You say we have to get Western muslims and imams to condemn ISIS. Good luck. I have read enough and seen enough surveys taken among muslims to see that the majority, while maybe disagreeing with their tactics, share the same ideology. To differing degrees I'm sure, but not different enough.
This aside, we don't have the time for a solution like this. ISIS has to be totally defeated on the battlefield NOW.
As I'm sure others have said, it's virtually impossible. People look at terrorism as though it's a new thing but it's existed throughout human history in different forms
Posted from TSR Mobile
Posted from TSR Mobile
Original post by oldercon1953
sincere question- you folks know more than I do about it but, has any country included within the M.E. ever worked out a serious problem with the other nations.
You say to support their military. Do you mean pick a country you like and fund it's military. How do you financially support a sovereign nation.Not sure what you mean here.
As cruel as Isis has been with the pop. of regions they have over-ran, what do you think the chances are that a massive multinational coalition (150 thousand boots-on- the-ground troops), would enjoy widespread acceptance and enough support to weed out ISIS troops from within the population.
If we had the cooperation of the locals in the areas ISIS is concentrated we could quickly sort through whole populations and determine who was friend or foe. This technique was used effectively used in WWll.
The only way ISIS is going to lose it's appeal is if it appears to be totally defeated militarily.
You say to support their military. Do you mean pick a country you like and fund it's military. How do you financially support a sovereign nation.Not sure what you mean here.
As cruel as Isis has been with the pop. of regions they have over-ran, what do you think the chances are that a massive multinational coalition (150 thousand boots-on- the-ground troops), would enjoy widespread acceptance and enough support to weed out ISIS troops from within the population.
If we had the cooperation of the locals in the areas ISIS is concentrated we could quickly sort through whole populations and determine who was friend or foe. This technique was used effectively used in WWll.
The only way ISIS is going to lose it's appeal is if it appears to be totally defeated militarily.
Look at Iraq and Afghanistan, these wars have backfired hard on the west.
As to your question about who to support, there's an organisation called the Arab League. It's a group of nations including the likes of Saudi Arabia, Iraq, Egypt and more. I believe they have a joint military force, the west should pressure them into using those troops. Since we already supply arms to countries like Saudi Arabia, they should put that into good use. Right now they are destroying Yemen, committing atrocious crimes. I don't support the arming of nations like Saudi, but against ISIS; that's an exception.
Back to my point, we should support the Arab Leagues joint military both by arming them and supporting them financially (although the rich Arab states could do the latter themselves). To be honest, I know next to nothing about this joint military other than the fact that it exists. Nevertheless, this is what I think should happen. I'm sure there are others who know more than me that can comment.
Original post by Zas_21
I sincerely doubt it ISIS is a complex group in its appeal anyway the void that was left behind by the UK and US actions was filled by the next most stable thing religion more importantly religious fanatics. Isis is using the propaganda of West vs Islam to get support. Its no secret that almost every Western country has the capability to destroy ISIS if they were fighting like and organised military, but they arent they are using more gorilla tactics and so bombing them into oblivion only ends up with more collateral damage which only worsens the problem and you end up with a Vietnam. Therefore the way to end the appeal of ISIS is by getting the Muslims in our Western society to condemn them and preach unity with other groups which i know many muslims do. The imams are a very powerful tool in the Muslim community, so the best way to get rid of ISIS is within. Also it helps if other Middle Eastern countries have a stake in the fight as well.
I agree with most of what you said bar the final third of the paragraph.
Muslims in the west can condemn day and night, 24/7 and it will do absolutely nothing at all. However Saudi can do much more, denounce ISIS and say flat out they aren't Muslims (I don't think this has happened yet). Even this won't be enough, it will only convince some they are wrong. These lunatics answer to no-one and must be removed forcefully. Ideally by 'Islamic nations' like Saudi.
Original post by AlifunArnab
Rather, a legitimate khalifa in the future would prevent random groups from popping up.
That's the long term solution.
Rather, a legitimate khalifa in the future would prevent random groups from popping up.
That's the long term solution.
You mean the Mahdi?
Original post by mercuryman
You mean the Mahdi?
No, I mean the establishment of a legitimate khilafa.
How many years would have to go by before we would know we have eradicated terrorism in the west?
Anyway obviously it can't be eradicated. Far better to think of ways to cut down death on the roads. We could probably slash them by making 20 mph the maximum speed.
But naturally no one wants that even though it would save dozens of children's lives every year.
What would aliens think of us eh?
Anyway obviously it can't be eradicated. Far better to think of ways to cut down death on the roads. We could probably slash them by making 20 mph the maximum speed.
But naturally no one wants that even though it would save dozens of children's lives every year.
What would aliens think of us eh?
(edited 7 years ago)
Original post by AlifunArnab
No, I mean the establishment of a legitimate khilafa.
It could work again; A modern-day Arab version of the EU. But I don't think that'll happen any time soon, with all these sects around it'll be impossible to reunite the muslims now. The only person that could ever reunite the muslims and help forge a caliph now in this time would possibly be the mahdi.
(edited 7 years ago)
Original post by moggis
How many years would have to go by before we would know we have eradicated terrorism in the west?
Anyway obviously it can't be eradicated. Far better to think of ways to cut down death on the roads. We could probably slash them by making 20 mph the maximum speed.
But naturally no one wants that even though it would save dozens of children's lives every year.
What would aliens think of us eh?
Anyway obviously it can't be eradicated. Far better to think of ways to cut down death on the roads. We could probably slash them by making 20 mph the maximum speed.
But naturally no one wants that even though it would save dozens of children's lives every year.
What would aliens think of us eh?
Aliens might envy the hell out of us. They may want to know how we've managed to avoid dividing the whole planet in two and constantly war over the entire surface. Or maybe they envy how we progress because they've stagnant for a few thousand years. Why do aliens always have to be smarter and wiser? Maybe their dumb as dirt. Just because they can travel across the galaxy doesn't necessarily mean their advanced. Maybe natural resources on their planet makes space travel a no brainer.
Original post by oldercon1953
Aliens might envy the hell out of us. They may want to know how we've managed to avoid dividing the whole planet in two and constantly war over the entire surface. Or maybe they envy how we progress because they've stagnant for a few thousand years. Why do aliens always have to be smarter and wiser? Maybe their dumb as dirt. Just because they can travel across the galaxy doesn't necessarily mean their advanced. Maybe natural resources on their planet makes space travel a no brainer.
Aliens will see how much we destroy the planet and other anima lives and will see us as evil.
Quick Reply
Latest
Trending
Last reply 3 days ago
Why is the political left now censorious and authoritarian??Last reply 3 days ago
Is it true that British unis are prejudiced towards degrees from Scottish unis?Last reply 3 days ago
If the Russell Group was now a fair representation of what it still claims to beLast reply 2 weeks ago
TSR Goes Green: How important will the environment be in this year's election?Last reply 2 weeks ago
Research Rankings of universities if you add Research Quality & Intensity percentagesLast reply 1 month ago
Is University of Birmingham prestigious and respected well enough in UK ?Trending
Last reply 3 days ago
Why is the political left now censorious and authoritarian??Last reply 3 days ago
Is it true that British unis are prejudiced towards degrees from Scottish unis?Last reply 3 days ago
If the Russell Group was now a fair representation of what it still claims to beLast reply 2 weeks ago
TSR Goes Green: How important will the environment be in this year's election?Last reply 2 weeks ago
Research Rankings of universities if you add Research Quality & Intensity percentagesLast reply 1 month ago
Is University of Birmingham prestigious and respected well enough in UK ?
