Killing terrorists as a method of eradicating terrorism is like stepping on cockroaches as a way of exterminating them. It won't work.

Arresting drug users and local traffickers as a way of eliminating drug abuse is similarly fated, I think. As long as folks want to use drugs, they will be made available by other folks. Ah, capitalism. The way to win the war on drugs is to notice that it's not a criminal problem per se, so much as it is a public health, mental health problem.

The point of all this is that to eradicate terrorism we will need to eliminate the causes of it. And frankly, as trite as it sounds, and as much VICIOUS criticism as this idea gets here and everywhere else that selfishness is elevated to a "good," the thing that does in fact conquer all is love. Violence begets violence. You guys who think we're going to effectively clobber those terrorists, are missing something. You're missing the fact that this will just inflame the situation, sooner or later. We're making it worse. Instead, if we win this fight against terrorism, it will be through communication, education, and the defeating of poverty.

If you don't treat the cause/disease, you won't eliminate the symptoms. Ain't that right, Moses?

Or, if you're not comfortable with solutions that take time and effort, the easy thing to do is just imagine that it's a WWF wrestling match. That we'll just clobber them. That's the easiest solution. Easy solutions are great. I just wish they worked.

Terrorism. Does that seem like a problem that should be easy and quick to solve?

Superman, well spoken as usual..................if they have not heard you yet, will they ever?

Keep the information flowing, maybe they will drown.:D

Supe - the defeating of poverty? Really? Poor like bin Laden and the middle class educated 9/11 highjackers? Dr. Zarkawi's medical practice was not paying enough? $60 a barrel not enough??

Communication? Education? Great ideas. Any suggestions?

Yes, we are charged with loving our enemies. And there are more than a few terrorists that need killing too..

The poor are a bit too busy trying to survive. Over and over it is the educated individuals doing the majority of the damage.

I agree with the eliminate the causes of terrorism approach. I don't have the solution, though. I bet that it'd help to pause and think about why some people hate us for being American.

I don't have the answers either. But I have some good questions, and so does strother here. I am mindful that BinLaden is rich, and that many of his Saudi henchmen are middle class or better. Nevertheless, I continue to consider this to be largely a cultural and public relations problem. And in the end, Dubya has underscored the choice we face. Genocide, or something else. Which is it? I doubt we can eradicate all Middle Eastern people, so I think the only realistic solution we are left with is a public relations one. And therein lies the debate. Is it enough for our public relations goals to simply demonstrate that we have lots of guns and bombs, and that we're happy to use them? Is that going to be enough? I'd like to think we can agree that the answer is "no." If we add an election and the temporary suspicion/perception that democracy is forming, then is that enough? I continue to doubt. We're hoping to deal with this problem the same way as with poverty here....by throwing an inadequate bit of quick money at it. I think it's not as easy as that.

Since it's fairly well documented that terrorists are born evil right out of the womb, I think it's time we all start painting our doorframes with lamb's blood and sit back and wait. God will take care of the rest.

On Fox news I just saw a report "inside the mind of a suicide bomber" and they said that "jihadists believe a peaceful existence with the West is dangerous". So much for loving them to death.

Yes, I know it's wishful thinking on my part. So how about incentives at home for these big companies, such as tax breaks? It'd be a win-win situation, no?

The problem is that no one in this country really wants to understand their motivations. Most people are happy with the explanation that "terrorists hate freedom" and therefore attack us. To call that simplistic would be an insult to the word 'simplistic.'

'Understanding motivations' is not a euphamism for 'offering therapy' that the Righties seem to think the Lefties want to do. Every great military leader has said that in order to defeat an enemy we must learn what makes them tick.

Personally, I don't understand the motivations, but I'm trying.

Fint - if the way we defeat them is by showing them they won't affect our policies, we're losing this war horribly. So much has changed in the US in the last 3.5 years - almost entirely as a result of the attacks on the WTC and Pentagon.

There is much to this...............it's our cultural influence they fear. Kind of like the French trying to keep English and Spanish words out of their language.

War will not increase trust and tollerance, war will only make it worse.

Makes you think we are just playing into their hands at times.

The sad part is like you said, david. The approach has been to make up simplistic slogans and continually repeat them until they become the truth. The world is a complex place and cannot be broken down into a few sound bytes.

Yes, our world has changed in the past few years, an entirely new paradigm. Economic and industrial strength is replaced with raw military power, as if that can solve all problems. Travel is more expensive. Fear and mistrust of people different than us has increased. Those who do not agree with "policy" are labelled as traitors, unAmerican, "terrorist lovers" and worse. WE have lost (or are losing) the right to dissent, little by little, making dissent an evil thing and dissenters supporting the "enemy". lYet we go on thinking nothing has changed. Interesting.

I am beginning to think that Orwell was right. Ignorance IS Strength, and most citizens are ignorant of how the world actually functions, thanks to pundits on both sides and closed minded policy makers who are less than honest with the public.

I am willing to wager that responses from one side will be far more vitriolic than from the other. Let's see.

I'm pretty young. I went from the bubble of my parents' house to the bubble of academia and only in the last couple years have I really started to form a world view as an independent adult. The questions I keep asking are, "Has the world always been this scary? Has it always seemed that we're teetering on the edge of something really really bad?"

I know the Cold War was scary - but death and the end of civilization are relatively simple. I've read "1984" and "A Handmaid's Tale" and that stuff is absolutely bloody terrifying. Ah, maybe a topic for another thread.

EDIT: Fixed title of a book.

The world is scarier on a global level because of the reach nations with advanced weaponry have. The world was aways scary on a personal level and war even scarier since it was for millenia one-on-one, making it up close and personal. OTOH, at a personal level, with the advent of good local government, collective things, like fire, police, water, sewer and refuse collection have made things "better" (read less personal; less hunting and gathering)

Read "A Canticle for Liebowitz" for an insight of a possible future. Written in the 60s and won awards. A truly frightening possible world of the future.

What have you come up with so far?

Since when is poverty the root cause of terrorism?

You asked for it. :) So briefly:

I think there is a rampant and unchecked disparity between the rich and powerful and the poor and helpless in most muslim countries. In order to maintain their wealth and power, those people have told their followers that the source of the pain comes from the spreading influence of the West. That way the huddled masses will direct their hate at us and not the wealthy clerics and oil shieks who hold all the cards, so to speak. Religion and culture as an opiate for the masses - it's not unprecedented by any means. The result of this is that there are plenty of poor Muslims who can get C4 and a vest for free but cannot get a pair of Levis and a Coke to save their lives (literally).

Moreover, they probably do legitimately feel that Western culture is impinging on their own. I don't like the monoculture in the US and I grew up here. Why in the world would someone who's accustomed to something else and idealizes something else embrace McDonald's, ****ty hollywood movies and reality TV? It's unfortunate that this different culture seems so outright hostile towards ours, but we have to respect that it's DIFFERENT and find a way to remove the threat to us without turning them into us. Until the day we shove our culture down their throats we're going to have to accept that there will backlash - some of it violent.

W. You young Sir, not only escaped the bubble of academia - but escaped unscathed!

Part I - I could not agree with you more.

Part II, this is undoubtly true. But look what a tizzy Western Europe was put in after coming home from the Crusades and fighting over the Iberian peninsula. Spices, silks, art, architecture, math, science, etc, etc, etc... I am sure we export too much junk food and crap media - but mixed in with all that are ideas to the status quo that are far more dangerous..

This is good stuff, are you a political science major or something?



Until the day we shove our culture down their throats we're going to have to accept that there will backlash - some of it violent.


Are we shoving our culture down their throats now? I mean giving them democracy and all.

Why should we accept that some of backlash will be violent? Couldn't they just demand oil payments in Euro's and hurt us even more - that is if it (anti-western culture culture) were from the top down and not from the bottom up as stipulated?