Serious Thread Topic: Can Terrorism Really Be Stopped?

[Coyote]

The cause of most of this has already been stated earlier. Young men with no jobs and no hope. Nothing to live for. Whether it is in the Middle East or the inner city, or the suburbs and the heartland now with meth addiction or opiates, young males that are hopeless are the cause of almost all the ills in all societies around the world. That we sell billions in arms to arab governments that take 95% of the profits of the oil in their countries while their populations live in poverty only provides the most fertile ground for recruiters to violence. Add in ignorance and religious fanaticism and you have a cauldron of boiling misery that is gigantic and looking to feel powerful. Witness Isis, who's members hold the power of life and death in their hands and can rape any woman or girl they see. The two ultimate powers that a young male can wield.


Go back to the line in A Christmas Carol.

From the Ghost of Christmas Present as two hideous children hide under his robe:
“They are Man's and they cling to me, appealing from their fathers. This boy is Ignorance and this girl is Want. Beware them both, and all of their degree, but most of all beware this boy for on his brow I see that written which is Doom, unless the writing be erased.”

A civilization lasts only until enough people in that society see that there is no hope for anyone other than a wealthy controlling few, then the civil society loses it's meaning as do the laws and the rule of the jungle is reinstated. And in the jungle it is angry young males in groups that control the countryside. Ignore the disenfranchised and someone else will not. They will recruit them with promises of power and dignity against the 'oppressors'. Forget the names of religions, countries, and sects. This is how humans everywhere through time behave.

There were lots of people unemployed here during the great depression. No problems approaching what we experience now. We had a different culture of people and mindset, of course.

So what would you call the OKC attack if it wasn’t terrorism?

An anomaly that happened over 2 decades ago, not an example that home grown terrorists are just as bad as the Jihadists we are dealing with now

It's a running joke that when we are trying to discuss radical Islamic Jihadists, some fool liberal is gonna chime in with "but, but OKC..."

I'm being honest & not trying to be mean, but it really has turned into a bad joke

If you want to be part of the solution, harping on isolated incidents to draw moral equivalency isn't helping

The topic was about stopping terrorism. Not just Islamic terrorism.

In the US we've had more deaths as a result domestic terrorism then from Islamic since 9/11. 9/11 skews it all because it was the single worst act of terrorism ever in the US.

It's dangerous to focus solely on Islamic terrorism. Just saying.

That depends on what you define as "terrorism" - are you including the Orlando shooting in your numbers?

I'd like to see a link to back up your claim of more deaths from domestic terrorism

Plus, I addressed the topic from the OP

This response of mine was addressing why the OKC incident from over 2 decades ago =/= what we see from Islamic terrorism

Defining something done by a lone whacko as a terroristic act does not make it the same thing

People who are talking about domestic terrorism are also addressing the topic, but you seem to discount the toll that domestic terrorism takes. Jihadist attacks get much more media focus - in part because although fewer, they generally do a lot more damage, but in terms of overall fatalities - the incremental toll taken by other terrorist attacks adds up to almost twice as many fatalities between 9/11 and 2015. It's foolish to ignore them in trying to figure out what to do about terrorism.

Lone whackos can be terrorists as well, in fact, a number of Islamic terror attacks have been done by "lone whackos".

This is between 9/11 and 2015:

https://www.nytimes.com/2015/06/25/...llenges-perceptions-of-top-terror-threat.html

WASHINGTON — In the 14 years since Al Qaeda carried out attacks on New York and the Pentagon, extremists have regularly executed smaller lethal assaults in the United States, explaining their motives in online manifestoes or social media rants.

But the breakdown of extremist ideologies behind those attacks may come as a surprise. Since Sept. 11, 2001, nearly twice as many people have been killed by white supremacists, antigovernment fanatics and other non-Muslim extremists than by radical Muslims: 48 have been killed by extremists who are not Muslim, including the recent mass killing in Charleston, S.C., compared with 26 by self-proclaimed jihadists, according to a count by New America, a Washington research center.​

 

[Coyote]

OKC was a lashing out at the Federal government in response to Janet Reno ordering people needlessly burned to death.

It was terrorism. Not lashing out. That's like excusing Islamists at lashing out for US meddling in the Middle East.

 

[EvilCat Breath]

Stop thinking there are good muslims that don't mean anyone harm.

 

[Coyote]

Stop thinking there are good muslims that don't mean anyone harm.

Damn. I keep forgetting they're all horrible evil subhumans.

 

[Uncensored2008]

So what would you call the OKC attack if it wasn’t terrorism?

An anomaly that happened over 2 decades ago, not an example that home grown terrorists are just as bad as the Jihadists we are dealing with now

It's a running joke that when we are trying to discuss radical Islamic Jihadists, some fool liberal is gonna chime in with "but, but OKC..."

I'm being honest & not trying to be mean, but it really has turned into a bad joke

If you want to be part of the solution, harping on isolated incidents to draw moral equivalency isn't helping

The topic was about stopping terrorism. Not just Islamic terrorism.

In the US we've had more deaths as a result domestic terrorism then from Islamic since 9/11. 9/11 skews it all because it was the single worst act of terrorism ever in the US.

It's dangerous to focus solely on Islamic terrorism. Just saying.

I prefaced my point by saying "it depends on the definition of terrorism" If words and ideas contrary to the party define "terrorism" then the means of stopping terrorism is what you democrats are already doing, revoking the Bill of Rights and the United States Constitution.

BTW, Terry Nichols learned to make his truck bomb from Abu Sayef in the Philippines. Elohim City the group that McVeigh was part of were a JOOO hating bunch, almost as much as you and the other lefties here. The terrorist group were pro-Palestinian and anti-Israel bunch, they could have been part of the democrats.

 

[Uncensored2008]

[

Damn. I keep forgetting they're all horrible evil subhumans.

Islam is a creed of pure evil, just like Nazism. There were Nazis who were not evil, there are Muslims who are not evil, but the creed itself is evil.

 

[sartre play]

Young People ( maybe unhappy) with no place to go each day no school, job or money are targets. can't see how we can fix that in other places, we have not figured out how to do it here yet .

 

[ricechickie]

OKC was a lashing out at the Federal government in response to Janet Reno ordering people needlessly burned to death.

All terrorism is "lashing out." Do you really want to split those hairs? Sounds like you think there's justified terrorism.

 

[Wyatt earp]

I'd like to get some thoughts from the liberals on this, because as a liberal, I really don't hear a whole lot of solutions to stopping terrorism. Probably because it can't be stopped. But I'd still like to hear if there have been any solutions proposed by the left.

Also would like to hear thoughts from the right about a real solution. Do you guys really think that bombing people into oblivion is going to end terrorism? We're talking about religious extremism here -- violence against them only adds fuel to the fire. Does the right actually have a real, actionable solution to ending terrorism?

My personal point of view is that you can't really stop it. I don't see how it's possible as long as people still cling to these poisonous ME religions. The only real way we'd ever end global terrorism is through a sort of collective spiritual and psychological evolution to the next level, where as a society we've moved past the violent idiocy of archaic organized religion. The change must come from within. But that just isn't in the cards for the foreseeable future. In other words, we're screwed and terrorism will become more and more of a "normal" part of life.

Discuss...

I think when somebody has no regard for their own life it makes it really difficult to fight without serious constraints on personal freedoms.

Unfortunately.


Jap kamikaze planes flew right into the guns, no avoidance, and some still got through....

Thanks for bringing up the old Japanese, they were nuts and have become a civilized society today...after we bombed them to kingdom come ...and occupied them still to this day.

Same with the Germans..


Yes it can be won.


.

 

[percysunshine]

No

 

[Wyatt earp]

Young People ( maybe unhappy) with no place to go each day no school, job or money are targets. can't see how we can fix that in other places, we have not figured out how to do it here yet .

So we don't have a 4.5% unemployment rate and our economy don't suck as Obama and the left claims ?


.

 

[dcbl]

People who are talking about domestic terrorism are also addressing the topic, but you seem to discount the toll that domestic terrorism takes. Jihadist attacks get much more media focus - in part because although fewer, they generally do a lot more damage, but in terms of overall fatalities - the incremental toll taken by other terrorist attacks adds up to almost twice as many fatalities between 9/11 and 2015. It's foolish to ignore them in trying to figure out what to do about terrorism.

Lone whackos can be terrorists as well, in fact, a number of Islamic terror attacks have been done by "lone whackos".

This is between 9/11 and 2015:

https://www.nytimes.com/2015/06/25/...llenges-perceptions-of-top-terror-threat.html

WASHINGTON — In the 14 years since Al Qaeda carried out attacks on New York and the Pentagon, extremists have regularly executed smaller lethal assaults in the United States, explaining their motives in online manifestoes or social media rants.

But the breakdown of extremist ideologies behind those attacks may come as a surprise. Since Sept. 11, 2001, nearly twice as many people have been killed by white supremacists, antigovernment fanatics and other non-Muslim extremists than by radical Muslims: 48 have been killed by extremists who are not Muslim, including the recent mass killing in Charleston, S.C., compared with 26 by self-proclaimed jihadists, according to a count by New America, a Washington research center.​

Um, no, I do not discount any terrorism

But the kid in Charleston who shot up the black church? Calling that an act of terrorism that is comparable to Islamic terrorism is just silly,

Redefining a word to fit your narrative does not change the facts - this is why many on the right refer to the NYT as "fake news"

Seriously , trying to put the Charleston incident in the same bucket as what we saw in Manchester is deceitful

And when I say "lone wolf" - I mean an individual that acts alone, without support from an organization trying to push an agenda

This is why I asked for a link

Your link does not advance your argument, but it does bolster mine

The only example they cite is something that was really not terrorism in the sane vein as what we saw in England. The terroristic attack in Manchester was a coordinated attack by an organized group with worldwide funding and a global agenda

We would be well served if our media would make that distinction

But they won't, because it doesn't fit their narrative

 

[ShaklesOfBigGov]

I'd like to get some thoughts from the liberals on this, because as a liberal, I really don't hear a whole lot of solutions to stopping terrorism. Probably because it can't be stopped. But I'd still like to hear if there have been any solutions proposed by the left.

Also would like to hear thoughts from the right about a real solution. Do you guys really think that bombing people into oblivion is going to end terrorism? We're talking about religious extremism here -- violence against them only adds fuel to the fire. Does the right actually have a real, actionable solution to ending terrorism?

My personal point of view is that you can't really stop it. I don't see how it's possible as long as people still cling to these poisonous ME religions. The only real way we'd ever end global terrorism is through a sort of collective spiritual and psychological evolution to the next level, where as a society we've moved past the violent idiocy of archaic organized religion. The change must come from within. But that just isn't in the cards for the foreseeable future. In other words, we're screwed and terrorism will become more and more of a "normal" part of life.

Discuss...

I agree with the rightwing about Islam being a serious problem. Most Muslims are peaceful, but let's face it, we wouldn't be in this age of terror if Islam never existed.

Yes, no terrorism can be stopped, but when it comes to improving national security, civil liberties must he sacrificed. That trade off is just the world we live in.

I would rather live with the thought of being killed by some unknown idiot with a bomb belt or a truck filled with explosives than give up my freedom... The government can not protect you from all acts of terror and how much freedom are you willing to surrender to pretend you are safe in life?

In case you haven't been made aware, you are already giving up your freedom every time we allow the government to intervene and make decisions FOR us, health care would be a prime example. As a result of the ACA mandate we have allowed the federal government to dictate on something that we MUST do for the greater good of all, the same greater good concern that you are sharing with giving up certain liberties in an effort to vet potential threats or provide added security measures at our airports and borders. If your aim is to see greater individual freedom, then you are an advocate of a smaller federal government with more power and responsibility being relinquished to the individual states.

 

[ShaklesOfBigGov]

It would be helpful if the Regressive Left would:

1. Stop dishonestly equating modern-day jihadism with modern-day Christianity
2. Stop transparently deflecting to the Crusades or other points of history as a way to dilute current-day jihadist atrocities
3. Stop transparently deflecting to political figures or political issues after every jihadist atrocity
4. Stop attacking anyone who dares to point out jihadist atrocities
5. Start holding Islam accountable for its anti-liberal elements
6. Start expecting Islam to move towards a true and badly-needed Reformation

The Regressive Left has done enough enabling. Children were just slaughtered. It's time to stop spinning for your pet PC constituent religion.
.

Whenever there is a need to equate extremists of the Islamic faith to a Christian of the crusades, there is an underlining message and a need to find some form of "justification" to make these terrorist acts an acceptable behavior. Losing over 2000 Americans on 9-11 is anything but acceptable.

 

[RetiredGySgt]

It would be helpful if the Regressive Left would:

1. Stop dishonestly equating modern-day jihadism with modern-day Christianity
2. Stop transparently deflecting to the Crusades or other points of history as a way to dilute current-day jihadist atrocities
3. Stop transparently deflecting to political figures or political issues after every jihadist atrocity
4. Stop attacking anyone who dares to point out jihadist atrocities
5. Start holding Islam accountable for its anti-liberal elements
6. Start expecting Islam to move towards a true and badly-needed Reformation

The Regressive Left has done enough enabling. Children were just slaughtered. It's time to stop spinning for your pet PC constituent religion.
.

And how would that stop terrorism?

For example, how would it have stopped these attacks, just a handful of the ones that occurred over the last decade:

DC Sniper Allen Muhammad
Richard Poplawski - who went on a rampage and shot 3 Pittsburgh police in 2009
Wade Michael Page - who attacked a Sikh temple in Oak Creek, Wisconsin in 2012.
Aaron Alexis - killed 12 people when he opened fire on the Washington Navy Yard in DC in 2013
Glenn Miller, Jr. - attacked a Jewish community center and retirement community in 2014
Jarad and Amanda Miller - went on a shooting rampage, killed two Las Vegas police officers, said to have held extreme anti-government views, 2014
Chris Harper-Mercer - went on a shooting spree at his college killing 10 people, had anti-religious and white supremacist views, 2014
Dylann Roof - went into a church and shot 9 people, wanting to start a race war, 2015

Ahh yes come up with a handful of examples and then claim somehow they equate to the THOUSANDS of attacks committed EVERY year by Islam.

 

[candycorn]

So what would you call the OKC attack if it wasn’t terrorism?

An anomaly that happened over 2 decades ago, not an example that home grown terrorists are just as bad as the Jihadists we are dealing with now
It's a running joke that when we are trying to discuss radical Islamic Jihadists, some fool liberal is gonna chime in with "but, but OKC..."
I'm being honest & not trying to be mean, but it really has turned into a bad joke
If you want to be part of the solution, harping on isolated incidents to draw moral equivalency isn't helping

9/11 was 16 years ago. Can you still use it as an example of terrorism or not?? The 1993 Attack was 24 years ago. I suppose it no longer applies?

 

[candycorn]

Not a lot of time for a detailed response right now but I think the following; forget about stopping it totally. Be it Radical Islam or Radical Christianity…there will be people who hate.

comparing "radical Islam" to "radical Christianity" is fallacious

seriously - Christians are not chopping off heads or perpetuating suicide attacks with mass support from an organized group

does not happen

If I believe that homosexual activity is a sin & express that view, or vote for people that would make it illegal =/= Islamic jihad

it's not in the same universe; yet, many on the left seek to draw moral equivalency - makes you look foolish and it makes it hard to take you seriously

I made an effort to answer OP without being argumentative; however, there IS one more thing.

We need to find a way to come together & agree on a solution.

Rhetoric like you are spewing in this quoted post serves to make that more difficult

we need to identify the actual problem & unite in an effort to slow it down & make it more difficult

talking about the Crusades or Timothy McVeigh or the Westboro Baptist Church (which is a hateful group, but still nowhere NEAR as bad as Jihadists) is counterproductive

So what would you call the OKC attack if it wasn’t terrorism?

McVie was not a Christian - his own words.

You don’t need to tell me. his actions proved it.
The same way a true muslim wants no part of beheading people, blowing people up, etc…

 

[skye]

If liberal/demrat stupidity can be stopped

terrorism can be stopped.

 

[Chuz Life]

Serious Thread Topic: Can Terrorism Really Be Stopped?

Maybe not entirely

However, we should start by defunding Planned Parenthood. I don't think any terrorist group denies rights and kills more innocent human beings than they do!

 

[Old Rocks]

At 73, I have seen the IRA bomb people in London, the Algerians bomb people in Paris, and, in our own nation, our homegrown terrorists bomb people in Oklahoma City, and the Al Queda take down the towers in New York. And long as there are people like Marion Morrison that believe the killing other people in wholesale lots solves problems, there will be terrorists and their victims.