War on Terrorism

[saravit]

Every so often I read something that makes way too much sense. This is from an email I got today:

Because we use the shorthand phrase ‘war on terrorism’ to describe the U.S. response to the September 11, 2001, terrorist attacks, it is easy to believe that this war-like all previous wars-can be won simply by killing the enemy, wearing them down

Comments

[goodall]

Al Qaeda is a multinational conglomerate with an infinite number of members. I say infinite because, in many countries, there are children who are raised specifically to become Al Qaeda members. This is not a war we can win with military.

[saravit]

That this isn't a conventional war is the entire point. Hence the focus on targeting a specific group that threatens the US, not the nations they happen to reside in.

There's a much more detailed examination of the issue in the PDF I linked if you're interested.

[goodall]

The point is, you can't target a specific group, The leaders have leaders, and the followers have followers, all over the world. Even if Osama Bin Laden is captured, Al Qaeda does not need him for their marching orders or to get recruits. They have plenty of folks lining up for all positions.

[saravit]

Did you READ the policy being described in the PDF?

[faolan_phe0nix]

I think all we can really do is sit down at the kitchen table and play "War on Terror" the boardgame**. It's probably just as useful as hoping our government will do the right thing, but it won't give you the same headaches trying to rely on government brings.

** this actually exists and is highly amusing