Does anyone seriously believe that you can have a war against terror?
372319
Read 1984.  It is not a war on terror.  It is a war.  Just a reason to go to war.  It is ambiguous.  It can continue indefinitely.  It has no terminus.  It is an excellent reason to violate rights.  It is an excuse to seize power and not let go.  It tramples constitutional rights.  It is a pseudo-martial law. (I could go on, but I won't)
151676
I agree that it is a tactic. I simply can not understand why we have not declared war on Al-Qaeda. The only reason I can dream up is that we are not interested in capturing bin Laden. With a declaration of war against them we could pretty much let all the countries know (including our own country) that we will get each and every member of Al-Qaeda that we can find. It is about time that we get some serious intelligence against these guys and actually "take it to them"\n\nI for one am sick and tired of us screwing around with this issue.\n\nIf I have to hear one more time "We havent been hit since 9/11" I am going to hurt someone. (We hadnt been hit for the eight years before that, but it did happen and it will happen again)
327248
HOLY COW...\n\nYour mind scares me tho.. I mean, I never thought of it but it seems like a real chance for someone to strike over.. I hope it won't happen.. but I think u think like a terrorist and need help :D!
210369
It can't be.  One of the reasons, given above, is the essential civilian control.  This includes control by congress, each congressman with their own agendas.\n\nSecondly, the Military forms an aspect of National Power under the DIME principle (Diplomacy, Information, Military, Economic).  Not sounding too simplistic, the military is a tool of national power which requires the other 3 aspects to make it work.  Soldiers and leaders are increasingly being trained in culture, languages, customs, infrastructure/city planning, and joint/multi-agency/ multi-national coordination skills.\n\nThere are also plans to cross-pollonate the State Dept and Military by sending senior NCOs and Officers to State Dept schools and vice-versa.  This, if the assumptions are correct, will reduce the infighting and inefficiency of the departments and create a more unified front in foriegn affairs.  Which is much better than the two departments stepping on each other!!\n\nIn addition, the National Security Council now includes Dept of Def, Dept of State, AND the Dept of Treasury (the Economic section of national power).  The first "shot" of the War on Terror had no explosives.  It was the shutting down of Al Qeada's financial backing in world banks (Diplomacy + Economic).  This crippled many terror operations as the money simply dissapeared.\n\nSo, the military can never be excluded from politics.  Now, refinment of polical influence so I don't have to please Senators X,Y,Z etc in order to get a new system introduced without pork and bankrupting the American People...THAT would be nice!!
883905
we have not had any terrorist attacks since the war on terror started.\nisn't that profit enough?
1107433
I'm going to need substantial proof befre I believe that our government murdered thousands of innocent people.  With the conspiracies flying, I still can't get past flying planes into buildings.  How could we get somebody to volunteer to kill themselves to start a war?  You need a belief system that goes beyond death to get somebody to sacrifice their lives for anything, and I can't see our government gaining that type of power over anybody just to start a war.
667193
Absolutely and they justify it by calling it a war on terror...hell its really a war on our civil liberties!!!!!!!!!
158508
anything is possible!terrorists will hit anytime anywhere! its just bad luck to be there when it happens and you cant live your life in fear so just forget about it and go on with your life!! fear is alqaida's main objective and its succeding to some degree!!!dont add to it be strong!
1176880
Terrorists have a home\nIf there is a war to be fought - let it be there
1092819
I think we are unchartered waters on this one.  We have never fought an enemy of this nature before so where to draw the line and how far to take it will depend on the world's willingness to stop the terror attacks.  As we saw with Spain, not all countries view this war the same.  But, unless there is a concerted effort on the part of all governments that value freedom to destroy the terrorists throughout the world we will never end this.  Afghanistan and Iraq are the tip of the iceberg.  The Islamic terrorists, and make no mistake that that is who this war is directed at, have the ability to travel all over the world and use the tools of cowards to continue their jihad.  Since we are not fighting a standing army, and I doubt that our estimates of people involved in terrorist oganizations is close to accurate, we cannot know when we "get them all".  The ultimate solution will have to come from a coalition of world governments being willing to root out these organizations on their soil and drive them into a corner where they are considered, and please forgive the use of the term, lepers.  Once they are seen as un-touchable (in that no one wants to touch them or allow them safe haven) then we can talk about drawing lines.
285435
The war on terror will probably never come to a complete and absolute victory regardless of who is sitting in the White House.  As long as there are haters of freedom and democracy there are apt to be terrorists.  \n\nPresident Bush warned us that this was going to be a protracted war.  He wasn't lying about that.
222293
Ask the Israelis if the war on terrorism is winnable.  The Israelis have been fighting in one fashion or another since its conception as a nation in the 1950's. We can only defend against terrorism.  Our existence as a nation could very well be the reason that most terrorist or countries that support them wont stop.  It will only win if they decide to give up and "live and let live". The truth of the matter isn't the fact of who is in office or what our politics is. Its a matter of our ability to BE CONTROLLED!  We can not as a people be controlled because we have rights under our system of laws that guarantee freedoms are protected.  To read the US constitution and our bill of rights states the major reasons for there hatred of the USA.  The truth is no its not winnable in one sense, BUT to just pick up and quit is the day we loose all rights as a nation to keep those freedoms they are afraid of...
635172
Well, I guess in a way if youre fighting war than that means youre starting a war against war, which means you are already contradicting yourself. The point im trying to make is it doesnt really matter what context it is in, it takes a war to start yet another.\n\nI applaud you for asking this question, but I am a lil confused as to why you did it since your ideology seems so thrown together and a little clumsy.\n\nI dont believe evil has a face. Its only a word we've constructed to seperate each other. But even if it did, are you saying that war exists because of "evil"? If thats true, than why do you feel that saying "war is wrong" is any different than saying that it is necessary?\n\nO i get it, we call that atitude nihilism - a belief that there is no point in caring because to care would mean that you think it is possible to change. But dont you think that in already saying it is impossible to change than you have already disqualified yourself from ever changing anything in the first place? \nDoesnt that whole idea go back to the "takes a war to start one" thing?
811224
In order to answer this we need to know why they are really there in the first place.  \n\nIf it is to stop terrorism than it cannot be won.  As long as therre are people there will be terrorists.  Killing people just breeds more hate and leads to a new generation of terrorist.  It is a war without winners.  Of course some would argue a war cannot be won or lost, justexists.
1141977
We are not winning the "war against terror" all because we made so many enemies that it is hard to figure out who is the terrorist and who is not.  Bush on the other hand; don't even know who is the terrorist because if he did; we wouldn't be in Iraq at the present moment.  The truth is we are our own terrorist and the reason I said this is because how many times do we hear someone American is blowing up something or trying to blow up something?  How many times do we hear about American killing American which goes on everyday of our lives?  I mean who is the real terrorist to us?  We can't control our own people in the USA so how do we figure that we can control someone else in another country?  No one is really winning the "war against terror or terrorist".
398049
YES! Why should people have to fight a war that they don't believe in, when really there doesn't need to be a war at all?
277597
You know... you ask some of the best questions...\nI do not believe it will be a war between the haves and the have-nots, at least not in the context of your question.  The current war on terror is a war of ideaologies, and the fundamentalist Muslims who the western world is fighting against are not necessarily the have-nots.  OBL is a multi-millionaire, and many of the terrorist organizations (Al Quada, Hezbollah, Islamic Jihad, Hamaas, etc...) are also very well funded through the sales of middle eastern oil.  In a sense the west is paying the wages of their enemies through their buying of middle eastern oil.  Make no mistake, the common man doing the fighting is middle to lower class.  That is true for both sides of the conflict.  But the governments and entities waging the war(s) are well off.\nAs stated, the war on terror (or the war against the capitalist west depending upon whose side your viewing from) is a war of ideaologies, just as the cold war was and as long as both sides can continue to foster said ideaologies the war will continue to rage on.