Quote:
|
Originally Posted by mburbank
Case in point. Afganistan was arguably a case for a serious war effort. Take out the Taliban, round them up, occupy the country with massive force, perhaps requiring a draft, certainly requiring taxes, pour money into infrastructure and jobs and kick the shit out of anyone who doesn't like it. Crude, nasty, costly, but for a reason and maybe worth it all in the end. Certainly provoked.
|
Here's where we get into the differences between a War on Terror and "treating terrorism like a police matter." The last thirty years have proven that putting out fires as they pop up does not work long term. In the 90's our military forces were dispatched 140 times. 95% of those times our troops landed in the same places... Different countries, but all with some striking similarities. Plot them on a map along with the poorest, most disconnected places in the world, and you will see a picture of what you have heard me refer to as "Globalization's Gap." The WOT is designed to close the gap. Your way of policing the gap is your war that will never end.
Disconnectedness is what causes terrorism. Despots and Dictators are what cause disconnectedness. These are the things we are fighting. THese are ties that bind together Al Quaeda, Saddam, Iran, Kim Jong Il... everything.... I have been through all this before, and recommended you a book on the subject. I would LOVE to see you feeling better about all this, but you just don't want to, obviously. If you change your mind, I'll be happy to type my fingers down to nubs for you.
Threaded Mode
