A war on terrorism can be won?
On average, everyone disagrees with significant nonconsensus between 279 voters.
Please read the comments from other voters below, then scroll down make your decision. Do you agree or disagree with the following statement?
A war on terrorism can be won
Reasons To Disagree
Terrorism is the effect of the impoverished trying to fight back. It's undesireable, but thats the truth. The more we go to war with "terrorist states", the more we encourage them to fight back. You cannot stop terrorism with war, you can only curb terrorism by ending peoples justifications to commit that terror. eg Liberating palestine, giving the IRA representation in Northern Ireland, contributing more aid and ending the repression of oil rich states.
31 August 2005
Terrorism is just another form of war, one used when someone can't meet their enemy head on. Its no more justifiable than war as it kills just as many innocent people and the killing of the innocent can never be justified. If you don't give the enemy a reason to hate you, you end both war and terrorism.
4 September 2005
My view is terrorism has little to do with the impoverished fighting back, it's predominantly about differences in mind, body and spirit. Today's terrorism has all been by groups with fanatical religious tendencies that has problems with Western ideology. Now in saying that, what is worse, the one who fights back out of vengeance or the one who struck the first blow for their own moral viewpoint? In every aspect, war will always be the bane of human civilization and in most ways decides the course of the future. Humans are now pessimistic beings who value survival and self-interest over the "Greater Good".
12 September 2005
Remember that the old meaning of Terror was as in a Rule of Terror, i.e. Terror by the government. The reason terrorists get their nickname is that they provoke a Rule of Terror. This causes the government to destroy their own business support and gives them no road back.
31 December 2005
Ideological wars don't tend to be won, so much as instill an inordinate amount of resentment by those upon whom war is declared.
12 April 2006
Police work is the proper counter to terrorism
18 August 2006
without God impossible .
10 May 2007
You can't win a war on terrorism any more than you can win a war on want. The "war on terrorism" is just an excuse to project American power around the world and to snatch away our civil liberties. Actually, the "war on terrorism" has increased the threat of terrorism, because it has resulted in even more destruction, impoverishment, injustice and oppression. Thanks to Bush and Blair, the real axis of evil, we are caught in a vicious circle. And now the self-righteous maniacs are talking about using nuclear weapons against Iran. They can't wait for Armageddon.
4 November 2007
It is the countries like America's fault that we are living in terrorismphobic golbal society today. Because of spontanious aspect of terrorism no it cannot be stopped. America also is finally paying for the miseries it has bought onto the Islam countries over the last century. So best thing America does now it to help heal the relationships it has with those countries and destroy the cause for radical expressions
2 April 2008
How long is a piece of string? Who / what is terrorism? Who defines that?
5 July 2008
those who think that "terrorism" is limited to Islamic extremism had better think again. Northern Ireland and IRA. Sri Lanka and Tamil Tigers Columbia and FARC Zimbabwe and ZANU PF Sudan and Junjaweed and plenty more...
26 July 2008
War on a concept cannot be won
20 August 2008
one man's terrorist is another man's freedom fighter. It is a war on ideals and the parties involved are disagreeing and are unlikely to ever agree
28 October 2008
We live in a world where terrorists vs. terrorists and a war on terror will never be won as long as American corporations want more money. They will continually carry out terrorist acts and encourage those who are the victims of that terrorism to carry out terrorism in return. Only then a perfect sustained resource using, interest making, resource gaining war will keep our economies afloat and the bank owners pockets full.
31 July 2011
Reasons To Agree
When you make the consequence of a terroist act more dreadful than the terroist act itself, you will win the war on terror. To do this we must first adopt the removal of civil and liberties and human rights as the terroists have done. To fight with one hand tied behind the back is where we are losing this war
24 April 2006
The most serious war on terrorism is the one we have right here in New Zealand, where maori separatists can do pretty much whatever they choose, kill kids and still be allowed to walk around freely with no requirement to cooperate with police... Here's an idea - let's split everybody up into two groups based on their ethinicity.. let's have all maori on one electoral roll and all non maori on another.. wow sounds like a great way to bring a country together. It's time to call a spade a spade.
20 July 2006
It's really simple - extradite all Muslims back to Muslim countries of their own choosing, allow them time to tidy up their affairs, pay for their flights home (on Muslim airlines). Then we will know where they are and if they want to declare war on the west, it can be operated under the rules of the Geneva Convention and in a manner that we can all understand. It won't be pleasant - in fact, it will be horrific - but it will be better than this stupid situation which reminds me of the fairground game where you try to hit a gopher who pops up randomly from a board full of holes and you are always on the back foot. I'm a realist, even a fatalist and I can see nothing but bad news for the future.
28 August 2006
Of course it can be won - but not with one or even both hands tied behind our backs.
20 September 2006
Yes - but remember its an ideological war not a conventional us-vs-them one
6 December 2006
We can win. First we mustn't be defeated - i.e. don't be terrorified. Secondly we go about winning - the key to this is a strategy of moderation. To over react is to loose the moral acendancy and faiure to address the root causes. For the few that will never accept moderation, we need to be prepared to deal decisively.
28 October 2007
the muslim coutrys have horrible laws as it is,they are not capable of fair play,my uncle was held hostage buy them...and hearing what he went through,from and inocent travel next to being held hostage,it dusgust me how they could be so doubt less.they need to be sent to there own countrys,if there not going to accept the rules here..they cant keep living here, if there going to go by there own laws,it puts everyone in danger.and we can win..muslim countrys are cowards,we have brave soilders
12 May 2008
It has to be won, if not then freedom will reign no more!
13 May 2008
It can be won, but maybe through other means than war. If America had spents its trillions on building up third world countries, imagine how much better its image and relations would be with both its allies and its enemies.
4 November 2008
Reasons for Remain Neutral
Terrorism exists in various forms. Our main conception of terrorism stems from the Israeli/Palestinian conflict. Solve that conflict and there will be no terrorism problem. It is in Israel's interests to magnify the threat of terrorism to justify its actions and help promote its own high tech security industries. With the helping hand of Jewish media we are bombarded with this phony "War on Terror" particularly through media such as Fox News. The USA was not attacked on 9/11, but rather 17 individuals managed without any weapons to wreck disportionate damage. There is no terror in New Zealand therefore nothing to be won or lost.
it hasnt yet, but whos to say it wont?
The war on terrorism is a misnomer: whose war on which terrorists? Terrorism (the application of random, unpredictable, violence) is a political act. The intention is to gain political objectives through the application of fear. There are no recent examples of terrorism achieving its objectives and the so called 'war on terrorism' simply prolongs a belief that it can. The best 'war on terrorism' is ordinary people going about their lives.
First and foremost we need to forget the language of an overarching 'war on terror' and set out clear moral justifications for each military action. Because the war on terror is amorphous, it is virtually impossible to explore whether it is capable of building a just peace and what that just peace might look like. It is clear that both Afghanistan and Iraq have a long way to go and there is a pattern of indifference to building long-term stable peace on the part of the anti-terror allies. This indifference could ultimately undermine the very purposes of the war on terror. This is a major problem, because, after all, the ultimate moral test of war is the quality of peace we leave behind.
You can make your comments once you have voted.