Marijuana.com

BurnoutX

The War on Drugs has been an extremely ineffective substitute for what really needs attention at this moment, Terrorism. In light of George Bush's recent comments that "not only will we go after the terrorists, but the countries that harboured them" is this just turning into another war on drugs?

Now just think for a moment that Terrorist Group A is responsible for these attacks and is operating out of say Iran. Now the United States starts bombing said Terrorist Group AND Iranian cities, how does that help here? Sure, security will be perked up for a month or two, but after that it will most definitely fall back to the level it has always been.

Now let's say that Terrorist Group B is working in collaboration with Terrorist Group A, Terrorist Group B is blatantly outraged at the bombing of Iran and Group A headquarters, so they send out THEIR suicide troops, resulting in yet another catastrophe within months of WTC destruction.

United States vows to get back at all Terrorist Groups, therefore, starts pumping billions of dollars into the WAR AGAINST TERRORISM, now the said war is a positive gesture in the eyes of most people, yet, how is it going to stop Terrorists?

It may stop some of the less intelligent Groups, but how is it going to fare against domestic terrorists? Or against groups of immense power?

Now this brings me to the final point. I have nothing against the War on Terrorism, infact, I think it's a good thing, but most likely it will turn into the next War on Drugs, with billions of dollars wasted every year creating minimal results. So I ask you, what as a people can be done?


Thank you.

 

Fuzz E L0g1c

I agree with just about everything you said except the we should have been paying more attention to terrorism comment. I think that was kind of a cheap shot in light of what just happened, and possibly contradictory to what you said later in your post....

I know this will be used as a justification to make billions disappear, right as I was reading this post, I was listening to the news, and the were reporting that Dubya was getting a <i>BLANK CHECK</I> to fight "terrorism." Just a week ago congress enthralled in a debate over what to do with social security and other budget issues, now practically everyone wants to throw every spare dime into the anti terrorism pot.
Of course I am not for terrorism, but I don't know if this is such a wise policy....

I also agree with your astute comments about the impossibility of stopping terrorism. Its the same "push-down-pop-up" factor that affects the WoD. You make an Airport totally secure (theoretically speaking of course) and then terrorist will go after an easier target like sports stadiums, college campuses, etc.
If you stop terrorism stemming from group X, or country X, they will simply move to another country, possibly our own. This will only elevate the situation. I'm not saying I have the solution though. (I also have a problem with people jumping to conclusions that this attack came from the middle east, before all the facts are in)

There has already been much talk about going to war. A senator from Colorado (my home state) has said he thinks we should bomb the people responsible for this into oblivion. The obvious problem is innocent people are going to persecuted at home (like what happened in W.W.II to Americans that had as little as 1/16 Japanese in their blood were contained for "national security")
and killed abroad. The people directly responsible for this are already dead anyway, they died in the planes.

As far as what we can do about this, well I have one suggestion, but I am late for school right now and will have to post it when I get back....
~~~~~~~~~~~


are you shooting up joints??

Niteshift

I think you're missing a few obvious, but key differences.

Tens of thousands of US citizens want drugs. Almost none want more terrorist attacks.

The US law enforcement plays by the rules. Sending military units into other countries to eliminate terrorists in hiding and in training will not be asking judges for warrants or waiting for their attorneys to show up.

Even IF the US violates some countries laws, or our own Constitutional contsraints, if we do it in a another country, who can do anything about it? The World Court? It has no power to really enforce law. The UN? Again, no power.

Unlike the WoD, at the moment, we have the support of almost every civilized country on the globe.

Unlike the WoD, we don't have citizens who think some terrorism is ok, but others aren't (pot is ok, other drugs aren't). No torn loyalties.

And you're underestimating the resolve of the American people. At this point, they'd give up a fair amount of convienence and personal freedom to deal with this. Sure, the ACLU will scream and yell, but the average guy on the street will go for it.

Would the WoT be easy? I spent a couple of years in a counter-terrorism unit; no it won't be easy at all. But I think it's a totally different animal than the WoD.

__________________
A burning desire for social justice is never a substitute for knowing what you're talking about. -Thomas Sowell

Sometimes the light at the end of the tunnel is muzzle flash.

BurnoutX

Allow me to clarify a few comments.

Reading over my post, I agree with your first paragraph Fuzz E.

Niteshift, I realize that you have experience in this area, but is it really possible to shut down every Terrorist unit on the face of this earth? I agree with putting more money and effort into the WoT, but not making it a frenzy of media propaganda (a la WOD)

However all of your comments make good and valid points about the power of the US and it's resolve.

Niteshift

I have no illusion that all of them would be eliminated. But we could cripple it severely. We are capable.

 

Fuzz E L0g1c

A two pronged approach: A strong national defense (which would of course include increased airline security) combined with an ultra-conservative foreign policy.

We need to focus all our efforts on protecting America not the world. We are over-committed inside other countries and wasting billions of dollars, manpower, and resources playing “world cop.”


Instead I suggest that we focus our attention on our own problems, our own defense, and our own country.

Greenman

Nice idea fuzzy, except this is a global problem. Being isolationist in reguards to terrorism is not going to make it go away. Terrorists don't care who they hit, so long as they get the message out. Since we are a major symbol of the free world, even the most isolationist and strongest of national defense programs will not keep us safe from people wanting to make a statement against what we, and a fair majority of other civilized countries out there, are all about.

This is a problem that will need to be taken up by the international community. No one is safe from this type of attack, nor will they be, not when you have people willing to kill themselves to fly a plane into a building. These people have no respect for human life, and they do not draw political boundries. Will we ever be able to conquer it, probably not. But what we can do is make a example out of this particular act and give them pause. It does your cause no good if your country gets wiped off the map because you are trying to make a point.

This is not about America. This is not even about Afganistan or Bin Ladin. The outrage is because this was a calculated, cold blooded mass murder of thousands of innocent people. Those people could have easily been German, Japanese, English, Chinese, whatever the nationality. If they are going to have the balls to kill thousands of Americans on America's own soil, with her own planes, what other country in their right mind can say they don't have to worry or take action and seriously mean it? And the global community should be outraged, and should be moved to action in response to this, reguardless of the nationality of the victems in this tragedy. It could very easily be their citizens next, expecially if there is not a strong and severe response to what has happened.

Peace.

__________________
Some will never open their eyes. Some will have them opened for them. Some will see light, some won't be able to stand the brightness and will turn away. -Robin Prosser's Diary Day 23 -- Please read our Posting Guidelines for questions on our policies.

kaoz1

There are only a couple of issues I see with the "War on Terrorism" - 1st this will be a long term war - though passion is running high at the moment there will be no quick end to this war. With that there will an extensive lost of lives and the dealing with less then desirable people in order to get the intelligence to have a WOT. I can also see this becoming almost a turf war - turn your enemy in as a terrorist and take over is area. Added to this the cost 40 billion as a down payment.

As Niteshift said - no one wants terrorism - except for the terrorist which seem well organized and willing to give up their lives for this cause. They are willing to threaten other governments for suppoting the US and this could actually work. Terrorism is easier to accept when it is on the other person's soil.

I would hope that this draws the attention away from drugs and we find that at least marijuana is legalized/decriminalized - there are a lot of young people to fight the war on Terrorism - they are in prison due to the war on drugs.

Auspex66

I think that the U.S can take out the large terrorists organizations, I think it is the small independant crazies that we have to worry about. It doesn't take an intelligent operation to fill a van full of high powered explosives (which can easily and cheaply be made at home, using the anarchists cookbook as a guide) and drive it into a college, business building, or whatever target is choosen. It's not just foreign terrorists we have to worry about anymore. All you need is one really demented person, and they all aren't of arab desent.
There's fct up people in america too!

Fuzz E L0g1c

Nice idea fuzzy, except this is a global problem. Being isolationist in reguards to terrorism is not going to make it go away.’

Greenman, I had half a mind to stop reading your post at this, the very first sentence. I never said that this is NOT a global problem or that what I suggested was going to “make it go away”

With one careless utterance, you have already straw-manned and distorted my suggestion so greatly I though about just totally ignoring you. If me and you were having this same convo, with no one else around, I'd mumble something about exercises in futility, and I’d simply walk away. But since there might be other people that will see this, I have decided to play ball.


My post was in response to the original question: “Now this brings me to the final point. I have nothing against the War on Terrorism, infact, I think it's a good thing, but most likely it will turn into the next War on Drugs, with billions of dollars wasted every year creating minimal results. So I ask you, what as a people can be done?”

Your post, on the other hand, was more of a vehicle for your rants on this particular situation.... I wasn’t even talking about the tragedy of 9/11, I was talking about what can be done in the future....I stand by my claim that in the future, America should dedicate herself to a strong national defense and an ultra conservative foreign policy. I believe this is the e best policy for keeping America safe...

Aside from that I have a serious problem with what you think should be our reaction...
“But what we can do is make a example out of this particular act and give them pause. It does your cause no good if your country gets wiped off the map because you are trying to make a point.”

Wiped off the map??? you are suggesting GENOCIDE man. Killing mothers and children that had nothing at all to do with this and just want to live in peace..

You sound like a terrorist yourself...

If this post sounds harsh to you, it’s deliberate.. You will have to pardon me if I don’t feel like sitting through another blood thirsty warmonger's half baked (pun intended) master plan. (Hitler reference intended).



~~~~~~~~~~~~~~




Let us cultivate our garden

Candide