How to defeat terrorism.

[Tricky]

Bubba Tricky just spammed me with this bit of advice for how to defeat terrorism.

To avoid Upchurch's copyright hammer, I'll just put in the headers, and you can read the rest on the links if you like.

• 1. Be feared!
  
• 2. Identify the type of terrorists you face, and know your enemy as well as you possibly can
  
• 3. Do not be afraid to be powerful.
  
• 4. Speak bluntly
  
• 5. Concentrate on winning the propaganda war where it is winnable. Convince hostile populations through victory.
  
• 6. Do not be drawn into a public dialog with terrorists, especially not with apocalyptic terrorists. You cannot win.
  
• 7. Avoid planning creep. Focus on the basic mission: the
  destruction of the terrorists...
  
• 8. Maintain resolve.
  
• 9. When in doubt, hit harder than you think necessary.
  
• 10. Whenever legal conditions permit, kill terrorists on the spot (Do not give them a chance to surrender, if you can help it.)
  
• 11. Never listen to those who warn that ferocity on our part reduces us to the level of the terrorists.
  
• 12. Spare and protect innocent civilians whenever possible, but: Do not let the prospect of civilian casualties interfere with ultimate mission accomplishment.
  
• 13. Do not allow the terrorists to hide behind religion.
  
• 14. Do not allow third parties to broker a peace, a truce, or any pause in operations.
  
• 15. Don't flinch.
  
• 16. Do not worry about alienating already-hostile populations.
  
• 17. Whenever possible, humiliate your enemy in the eyes of his own people.
  
• 18. If the terrorists hide, strike what they hold dear, using clandestine means,whenever possible, foreign agents to provoke them to break cover and react.
  
• 19. Do not allow the terrorists sanctuary in any country, at any time, under any circumstances.
  
• 20. Never declare victory.
  
• 21. Impress upon the minds of terrorists and potential terrorists everywhere, and upon the populations and governments inclined to support them, that American retaliation will be powerful and uncompromising.
  
• 22. Do everything possible to make terrorists and their active supporters live in terror themselves.
  
• 23. Never accept the consensus of the Washington intelligentsia, which looks backward to past failures, not forward to future successes.
  
• 24. In dealing with Islamic apocalyptic terrorists, remember that their most cherished symbols are fewer and far more vulnerable than are the West's.
  
• 25. Do not look for answers in recent history, which is still unclear and subject to personal emotion.

My response to him was that these are very much like the tactics that Israel has been employing for years, so by now, they should be terrorist-free.

To avoid confrontation, I did not say that this looked like the manual on how to be a terrorist.

 

[Tmy]

So to fight terror,.......BECOME a terrorist. Arent you becoming the very thing you despise??


Why NOT negotiate with terrorist. Or at least leave that option open. Why would you needlessly close a door?? It seems that a lot of the fighting is ego driven. (Ill show everyone Im not weak.)

 

[hammegk]

Despise Terror?

Not getting it right, but paraphrasing -- it struck me like a diamond bullet between my eyes ... you must make Terror your best friend ... or Terror will become your worst enemy.


I'm willing to rationalize all the deaths & atrocities that smite "them & theirs" to keep the peace for "me & mine".

 

[Tmy]

Ironically alot of that list can be used in a How to Create Terrorists book.

So while your defeating terrorists your also creating them at the same time when you were really tryuing to destroy them...........My head hurts.

 

[dsm]

It seems to me that the focus for fighting terrorism might be in the wrong place. The approach that has been taken for fighting terrorism is to fight the terrorists! I'm beginning to think that that is the wrong place to focus your efforts. I think the right place is in long term education of all sides. In essense, this is a propaganda strategy, but what's wrong with propaganda that highlights the best things in life?

Consider Islamic fundamentalism. We (in the West) have been saying that the fundamentalists have a perverted view of Islam in that Islam is a religion of peace, but they are using it to promote violence. Rather than simply state this and move on, are there factions in Islam that we (in the West) could emphasize to show a more discernable line between what we view as "good" Islam and "bad" Islam? Could we use the media to show how practice of these (favorable?) versions of the Islamic faith is still in keeping with the Islamic faith?

In other words, if we can win the minds of the people who might (grow up to be?) terrorists, wouldn't we be stopping terrorism?

 

[Grammatron]

It seems to me that the focus for fighting terrorism might be in the wrong place. The approach that has been taken for fighting terrorism is to fight the terrorists! I'm beginning to think that that is the wrong place to focus your efforts. I think the right place is in long term education of all sides. In essense, this is a propaganda strategy, but what's wrong with propaganda that highlights the best things in life?

Consider Islamic fundamentalism. We (in the West) have been saying that the fundamentalists have a perverted view of Islam in that Islam is a religion of peace, but they are using it to promote violence. Rather than simply state this and move on, are there factions in Islam that we (in the West) could emphasize to show a more discernable line between what we view as "good" Islam and "bad" Islam? Could we use the media to show how practice of these (favorable?) versions of the Islamic faith is still in keeping with the Islamic faith?

In other words, if we can win the minds of the people who might (grow up to be?) terrorists, wouldn't we be stopping terrorism?

That all sounds good but how do you actually accomplish that? Would you listen to a TV that says, "you are practicing your religion wrong and here's why" or would you ignore it and get angry? I don't think there's is one magical solution to defeating terrorism. There needs to be a combination of force, education and monetary help and a long period of time in order for you to even begin to see results.

 

[Tmy]

The list assumes yourfighting religious fundamentalists. Thats not always the circumstance.

For example eco terrorists. Do you think itd be wise to shoot them on site? Not get into a public dialog with them? Dont let civillian casualties stop you?

 

[Jocko]

That all sounds good but how do you actually accomplish that? Would you listen to a TV that says, "you are practicing your religion wrong and here's why" or would you ignore it and get angry? I don't think there's is one magical solution to defeating terrorism. There needs to be a combination of force, education and monetary help and a long period of time in order for you to even begin to see results.

Never mind the fact that just having cable or satellite TV in some of these hellholes is a capital crime.

 

[dsm]

Never mind the fact that just having cable or satellite TV in some of these hellholes is a capital crime.

So bypass technology and go directly to the people in the same way that the terrorist(?) leaders are (or have been).

Being the "world leader" should mean MUCH more than "we have the biggest guns and the most money, so do what we want."

Maybe we could recruit the Jehovah's witnesses to spread the (good) word...

 

[dsm]

That all sounds good but how do you actually accomplish that? Would you listen to a TV that says, "you are practicing your religion wrong and here's why" or would you ignore it and get angry? I don't think there's is one magical solution to defeating terrorism. There needs to be a combination of force, education and monetary help and a long period of time in order for you to even begin to see results.

Agreed. My point is that the "education" component of the strategy seems to have been very weak in the past whereas it should be the strongest component of the strategy.

 

[Jocko]

So bypass technology and go directly to the people in the same way that the terrorist(?) leaders are (or have been).

Won't work, terrorist leaders operate (ostensibly) on religious principle and tribal connections. You'd have to find some Methodist Mullahs if you're going to pull that off.

Being the "world leader" should mean MUCH more than "we have the biggest guns and the most money, so do what we want."

When you're dealing with an under-educated and over-religioned people, "should" don't mean squat. You're not going to talk down a Fallujah mob any more than you could talk down a post NBA championship mob, and these mobs get started by the clerics (which brings us back to your first point above).

Maybe we could recruit the Jehovah's witnesses to spread the (good) word...

No argument here. Not that I believe they'd succeed, but anything to get those guys overseas is fine in my book.

 

[Jocko]

Agreed. My point is that the "education" component of the strategy seems to have been very weak in the past whereas it should be the strongest component of the strategy.

Yes, but "education" (in the western sense of the word) is all but forbidden to most of these people. Even if it were somehow provided, it would be heresy to indulge in it.

No, I'm beginning to believe more and more that the answer is to lop off the head of the beast and try to recycle the remains. The extremists have to go, and if that results in chaos, well.. we'll just have to deal with it. At least their removal would create a chance of bringing proper education to the table.

 

[bignickel]

Bubba Tricky just spammed me with

6. Do not be drawn into a public dialog with terrorists, especially not with apocalyptic terrorists. You cannot win.

AKA Do not work to a peaceful resolvement of the conflict with the group who is at war with you. If you did, that would mean that THEY WON!

For example, if your army is on their holy land, and it's driving them nuts, whatever you do, don't remove your army!

9. When in doubt, hit harder than you think necessary.

This will ensure more young men rushing to join the terrorist camps, thus keeping a constant supply of targets (on both sides).

12. Spare and protect innocent civilians whenever possible, but: Do not let the prospect of civilian casualties interfere with ultimate mission accomplishment.

AKA If you think that killing a terrorist's family and relatives will send a message, "have at it MacDuff, and damn he who cries hold."

13. Do not allow the terrorists to hide behind religion.

AKA Have you considered bombing during Ramadan? Or rubbing bullets in pig fat?

14. Do not allow third parties to broker a peace, a truce, or any pause in operations.

See #6.

15. Don't flinch.

AKA The SS had to overcome this to become strong. So should you. You must do it for the glory of the Fatherland!

20. Never declare victory.

AKA If you declare victory, how is the President going to get more anti-freedom measures passed at home?

22. Do everything possible to make terrorists and their active supporters live in terror themselves.

AKA Have you considered how effective terrorist tactics really are? Why not use them yourselves?

23. Never accept the consensus of the Washington intelligentsia, which looks backward to past failures, not forward to future successes.

AKA If you do something over and over again expecting differant results...

eventually, you'll get them!

 

[rikzilla]

Re: Re: How to defeat terrorism.

So to fight terror,.......BECOME a terrorist. Arent you becoming the very thing you despise??


Why NOT negotiate with terrorist. Or at least leave that option open. Why would you needlessly close a door?? It seems that a lot of the fighting is ego driven. (Ill show everyone Im not weak.)

Now just hold your horses there pard! I've heard you wishy-washy liberal types hold forth on the subject of terrorism many a time. When we on the right mention the war on terror, you guys generally guffaw and talk about how "terror is merely a tactic" that we "might as well go to war against a flanking movement".

Well then, let's look at this list from that vantage point shall we? Number one, how are we becoming the "thing we despise"? How can we despise a "tactic"?? If we are to prevail against this "tactic" do we not need to counter it somehow? And if we counter it by using some of it's more successful properties against it isn't that sound strategy??

The truth is that liberals hate the state unless it's a socialistic nanny state. You guys don't see terrorists, you see desperate, angry, impoverished people fighting the "imperialist oppressor".

The fact is that without a free and democratic government liberals are generally not even allowed to openly exist unless they serve the state. Now, do your liberal Iraqi bretheren a favor and get behind the successful imposition of democracy in Iraq. Without it, those who hold your (and our) heretical and progressive beliefs are doomed to a life of silence, or imprisonment and death.

They'll thank you for it later by protesting their own capitalistic, fascist, and imperialistic government.

-z

 

[dsm]

Yes, but "education" (in the western sense of the word) is all but forbidden to most of these people. Even if it were somehow provided, it would be heresy to indulge in it.

Not that I disbelieve you, but could you provide some examples for statements like this?

No, I'm beginning to believe more and more that the answer is to lop off the head of the beast and try to recycle the remains. The extremists have to go, and if that results in chaos, well.. we'll just have to deal with it. At least their removal would create a chance of bringing proper education to the table.

If "education" is not making the necessary impact in the world to achieve the desired results, then perhaps the world needs to be changed. This does not necessarily mean (a potentially unending) war, but rather the creation of better institutions to facilitate the education of the masses. For instance, change the constitution of the UN to require that members accept certain educational requirements for their people.

I know that many (most?) countries would not accept such requirements. Leadership requires working through that problem rather than simply throwing in the towel. That may mean finding ways to let the people of a country know what offers of help it's "leaders" have turned down and, thus, embarass those leaders to operate in good faith. I'm not ignoring the war component in this strategy -- I'm just trying to emphasize the other components of the strategy.

 

[LFTKBS]

We should just nuke all the brown people, right? 'Cause that's what I keep hearing on Free Republic.

 

[dsm]

Out of curiousity, can someone list the most recent overthrows of governments by (some of?) the people governed by the governments?

Can one person still make a difference?

 

[Tricky]

Now just hold your horses there pard! I've heard you wishy-washy liberal types hold forth on the subject of terrorism many a time. When we on the right mention the war on terror, you guys generally guffaw and talk about how "terror is merely a tactic" that we "might as well go to war against a flanking movement".

There have been treaties against certain "tactics". As a matter of fact, the Iraq invasion was sold to us as a war against the "tactic" of using WMDs. Use of nukes is another tactic that might cause people to turn against a country, regardless of how righteous their cause. (The US got a break in WW II because nobody knew how bad nukes were.) So I don't see the "war against terrorism" as silly. Many liberals would gladly support a "war against nukes". I'm one of them.

But I still argue that our methods in this "war" have not decreased the liklihood of terrorist attacks, but increased it. It is not that the war is bad, but that we are fighting it badly, and the list that I started this thread with is exhibit A in how to lose a war against terrorism.

Well then, let's look at this list from that vantage point shall we? Number one, how are we becoming the "thing we despise"? How can we despise a "tactic"?? If we are to prevail against this "tactic" do we not need to counter it somehow? And if we counter it by using some of it's more successful properties against it isn't that sound strategy??

I agree that we must counter it. I disagree that Peters has a sound strategy. How in the world can you emulate the "successful properties of terrorism" to fight terrorism. If you do, then you have simply given in to terrorism and letting them set the rules.

The truth is that liberals hate the state unless it's a socialistic nanny state. You guys don't see terrorists, you see desperate, angry, impoverished people fighting the "imperialist oppressor".

C'mon Rick, you should know better by now. You can't think like a liberal, so you have now idea what they think. Don't even bother trying to make a strawman of the liberal position, because you are simply no good at it. Maybe if you ever showed some empathy with liberals, I'd take you a little more seriously.

Oh yeah, those conservatives hate "nanny states" that tell you to recite "under God" in the pledge and tell women they can't have abortions. Both liberals and conservatives believe in "nanny states", they just disagree on the nanny's job description.

The fact is that without a free and democratic government liberals are generally not even allowed to openly exist unless they serve the state. Now, do your liberal Iraqi bretheren a favor and get behind the successful imposition of democracy in Iraq. Without it, those who hold your (and our) heretical and progressive beliefs are doomed to a life of silence, or imprisonment and death.

Believe me, good liberals (like myself )are very much in favor in the seeding of democracy in Iraq. I wouldn't use the term "imposition" because how the hell can you "impose" a democracy and still have it be a democracy? We liberals accept that what Iraq considers a democracy may differ from what we consider a democracy.

But we must agree, that if the warlords and clerics continue to hold the strongest coalitions in Iraq, then they will be the ones elected by the "democratic" government. Can you conservatives accept a democracy where you don't like the winners? What will you do if you think resulting "democracy" is not a real democracy? Will you invade again untill you get the puppet state you desire?

They'll thank you for it later by protesting their own capitalistic, fascist, and imperialistic government.

Well, you know they do. That is why Saddam had to keep putting down rebellions. He was not loved, but they love us even less. Perhaps we need to leave these feudal states alone and only send inspectors to make sure they can't threaten others with WMDs. Wow! What a concept!