if you put some of the pieces together that have been popping up in the news, you start to see a very clear picture that the "war" on terror is more than a little ill-conceived ...
diplomacy is virtually non-existent with neocons ... as Kerry said, terrorism should be dealt with as a policing action, not a military action ... our alliances grow weaker and weaker as we unilaterally fight the WOT and alienate most of the world in the process ... putting it as simply as possible, the neocon "war on terror" has devoured America's soul ...
when measured in terms of costs and benefits, the neocon approach to dealing with terrorism, i.e. waging a "war" on terror, is a big loser ... should it have been a national goal to lose US prestige in the world? should it have been a national objective to threaten civil liberties domestically to fight the WOT? do Americans want to see country after country withdraw from the "coalition of the willing" because they have grown disenchanted with US policy in Iraq? How do we measure the tragedy of more than 2600 American lives lost in Iraq and tens of thousands of critically injured? And what has been the cost of American policy to the Iraqi people themselves? Their country is destroyed; their country is in a civil war; their country faces being broken up into pieces and sold off for scrap ... and in the end, most Americans understand that the neocon WOT HAS NOT MADE US SAFER ... it's made us less safe ... in the cost/benefit analysis business, we call that the bottom line and we call it a big loser ...
some read things like this or hear things like this and immediately jump to the conclusion that the underlying message is that "terrorists" don't exist at all ... that is NOT the message ... "terrorists" do exist ...
what doesn't exist, or shouldn't exist, is the neocon reaction to these "terrorists" ... we cannot fight the whole world ... we cannot continue to bomb everything that moves ... we cannot disregard the sanctity of sovereign foreign governments just because we have "some business to conduct in their area" ... we cannot arrogantly project American military might whenever we please wherever we please ... we cannot ignore the reaction of the rest of the world to America's quest to remake the world in its own image ... and we cannot continue to invest in exorbitant military madness beyond any sense of proportion or affordability ... our national debt is staggering and our military is stretched to dangerous levels ...
the solution to terrorism is not monolithic ... MOST IMPORTANTLY, we need to truly understand why anyone person or country seeks to harm the US and its citizens ... they might be madmen ... they might "hate us for our freedoms" ... neither is plausible ... if others are attacking us, we should start by examining our own conduct in the world ... have we given them reason? or at least, even if we are not at fault, do they believe we have given them reason? that has to be the starting point ... here's a hint: while terrorism against civilians is never justified, we have definitely given them reasons ... whatever else we do to track down those who would attack us, we need to examine our own conduct as well ...
the very notion of waging a global "war" on terrorism is fundamentally flawed ... it's time for Americans, with the help of Democrats, to learn that we have been sold "a product" that is very harmful to all of us ... and it's time to make the REAL changes in our national approach to terrorism that will put us on a much saner path to really solving the problem ... we don't need a "war" on terrorism at all; we need a comprehensive, multi-faceted change in policy ...
here's what Soros had to say:
source:
http://www.commondreams.org/views06/0815-35.htmA Self-Defeating WarThe war on terror is a false metaphor that has led to counterproductive and self-defeating policies. Five years after 9/11, a misleading figure of speech applied literally has unleashed a real war fought on several fronts -- Iraq, Gaza, Lebanon, Afghanistan, Somalia -- a war that has killed thousands of innocent civilians and enraged millions around the world. Yet al Qaeda has not been subdued; a plot that could have claimed more victims than 9/11 has just been foiled by the vigilance of British intelligence.
Unfortunately, the "war on terror" metaphor was uncritically accepted by the American public as the obvious response to 9/11. It is now widely admitted that the invasion of Iraq was a blunder. But the war on terror remains the frame into which American policy has to fit. Most Democratic politicians subscribe to it for fear of being tagged as weak on defense.
What makes the war on terror self-defeating?
* First, war by its very nature creates innocent victims. A war waged against terrorists is even more likely to claim innocent victims because terrorists tend to keep their whereabouts hidden. The deaths, injuries and humiliation of civilians generate rage and resentment among their families and communities that in turn serves to build support for terrorists.
* Second, terrorism is an abstraction. It lumps together all political movements that use terrorist tactics. Al Qaeda, Hamas, Hezbollah, the Sunni insurrection and the Mahdi army in Iraq are very different forces, but President Bush's global war on terror prevents us from differentiating between them and dealing with them accordingly. It inhibits much-needed negotiations with Iran and Syria because they are states that support terrorist groups.
* Third, the war on terror emphasizes military action while most territorial conflicts require political solutions. And, as the British have shown, al Qaeda is best dealt with by good intelligence. The war on terror increases the terrorist threat and makes the task of the intelligence agencies more difficult. Osama bin Laden and Ayman al-Zawahiri are still at large; we need to focus on finding them, and preventing attacks like the one foiled in England.
* Fourth, the war on terror drives a wedge between "us" and "them." We are innocent victims. They are perpetrators. But we fail to notice that we also become perpetrators in the process; the rest of the world, however, does notice. That is how such a wide gap has arisen between America and much of the world.
Taken together, these four factors ensure that the war on terror cannot be won. An endless war waged against an unseen enemy is doing great damage to our power and prestige abroad and to our open society at home. It has led to a dangerous extension of executive powers; it has tarnished our adherence to universal human rights; it has inhibited the critical process that is at the heart of an open society; and it has cost a lot of money. Most importantly, it has diverted attention from other urgent tasks that require American leadership, such as finishing the job we so correctly began in Afghanistan, addressing the looming global energy crisis, and dealing with nuclear proliferation. <skip>
Printer-friendly format
Email this thread to a friend
Bookmark this thread
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
