what are the 2 most powerful weapons in the fight against terrorism?
920315
We have fostered most of the terrorism ourselves.  We started and funded Osama in Afghanistan, training many of his people.  We funded and supported Saddam, even when he gassed the Kurds.  We support dictatorships all over the Middle East, while lusting after their oil.  We establish military bases from Israel to Saudi Arabia, Kuwait, Iraq, and Afghanistan.  We are trying to bully the region.  Our presence used to be just arrogant.  Now I can't imagine the words the locals use for us.  We are despised across the region for the hypocrisy and imbalance of our  policies, and now we have invaded two of their neighbors, in one without any just cause.  Our next threat is to Iran.  We must examine our own behavior before  we go tossing out terms like terrorist.  We have terrorized more people, and for a much longer time, than anyone has terrorized us.  The weapons  you speak of  are in our own hands.  Perhaps we might just consider putting them down.
972475
The 9mm will take about anyone. It is very effective here in Afghanistan and was effective in Iraq too. I prefer the M4 and M24 more. Being able to reach out and touch someone before they can fire back is the safest way to go.
856925
The Harpoon is an anti ship missile, fired from; let's say an F-16. The Tomahawk is capable of destroying entire buildings and is even capable of carrying a nuclear warhead (never used before). But there could be more out there in the non US defence market, we never know. The Russians and the Chinese have some neat stuff. Peace to the world.
602872
Terrorism is the most critical issue facing our world today. To strengthen and augment our government’s current antiterrorism efforts, we urgently need a more fundamental approach that neutralizes the very basis of terrorism, preventing terrorist attacks before they begin.\n\nAn approach—known as the Invincible Defense Technology—calls for the establishment of a permanent group of 40,000 experts in “technologies of consciousness” to neutralize the acute ethnic and religious tensions that fuel violence and social conflict, effectively disarming terrorism at its basis. This approach is an essential component in any comprehensive approach to combating terrorism.
471066
I think England has the strongest most powerful military, but France also has a nuclear weapon.\n\nGerman economy has a stronger GDP.\n\nSo there isn't a real definate answer. But if you had to tie me to one Id say Germany cause of their economy and the fact that they have allies enough where if they were attacked again by Russia they'd fight em off.
85094
The US is at war with terror, which includes all terrorist organizations.
279089
http://search.yahoo.com/search?p=What+are+two+contrasting+models+of+terrorism+in+the+cold+war+era%3F&sm=Yahoo%21+Search&fr=FP-tab-web-t&toggle=1&cop=&ei=UTF-8\n\nhttp://www.ask.com/web?q=What+are+two+contrasting+models+of+terrorism+in+the+cold+war+era%3F&qsrc=0&o=0
1137579
M-16s?  No.  Not powerful enough.\n\nDillon 20 mm mini-guns installed on HUMVEES and Apache helicopters.  And land mines.  Let's not forget land mines.
717885
The US Army.\n\nThe Letherman Multi-tool is issue.\n\nHint: Never bring a knife to a gunfight.
85380
bomb is an explosive device which, although not containing more energy than ordinary fuel (except in the case of a nuclear weapon), generates and releases its energy very rapidly, as a violent, destructive shock wave. It is usually some kind of container filled with explosive material, designed to cause random destruction when set off. The word comes from the Greek βόμβος (bombos), an onomatopoetic term with approximately the same meaning as "boom" in English.\n\nThese are first and foremost weapons; the term "bomb" is not usually applied to explosive devices used for civilian purposes (such as construction or mining), although the people using the devices may or may not sometimes refer to them as bombs. Note that many military explosive devices are not called "bombs". The military mostly calls airdropped, unpowered explosive weapons "bombs," and such bombs are normally used by air forces and naval aviation. Other military explosive devices are called grenades (such as hand grenades), shells, depth charges, warheads (in missiles), or land mines.\n\nThey have been used for centuries in warfare and are a central part of the terrorist's arsenal. They fall into three distinct categories: conventional (filled with chemical explosives), dispersive (filled with submunitions, chemicals or other disruptive agents which are spread on or shortly before impact) or nuclear (relying on nuclear fission or nuclear fusion for their effect).\n\n \nDevice originally thought to be a pipe bomb, found to be a time bomb. From a U.S. government publication.A distinction is commonly drawn between terrorist and military bombs. The latter are almost always mass-produced weapons, developed and constructed to a standard design out of standard components and intended to be deployed in a standard way each time. By contrast, terrorist bombs are usually custom-made, developed to any number of designs, use a wide range of explosives of varying levels of power and chemical stability, and are used in many different ways. For this reason, they are generally referred to as improvised explosive devices or IEDs.\n\nThe most powerful bomb in existence is the hydrogen bomb, a nuclear weapon. The most powerful bombs ever used in combat were the two nuclear bombs dropped by the United States to attack Hiroshima and Nagasaki. The most powerful non-nuclear bomb is the United States Air Force's MOAB (Massive Ordnance Air Blast).\n\nThe most powerful bomb ever was Tsar Bomba: ca. 50 Mt; it had a mass of 27 tons; it was dropped from a bomber for a test, but was for various reasons not very suitable for combat.\n\nThe first hydrogen bomb Ivy Mike (10.4 Mt) was even heavier in mass, 82 tons. It was too heavy to be deliverable by a plane or rocket, and therefore not very suitable for an attack.
1162473
1.  Israel, because they don't honor their alliances (e.g. bombing of the USS Liberty) and often act impulsively in an overly-aggressive manner.  I think they would actually use their nuclear weapons without giving it a second thought.\n\n2. North Korea, because they've proven that they don't honor any agreements and that they have no problem with being duplicitous (e.g. getting aid for not developing weapons while secretly developing weapons).  Clearly they are determined to develop nuclear weapons, but I'm not so sure they would be willing to use them.\n\n3.  The US may pose the greatest threat to North America, since they are the only country that has actually used a weapon comparable to a nuke.  They have the means, and they are clearly willing.  Will their current policies lead to their use, which presumably would be followed by a counter-attack that would decimate parts of North America?
837215
Al Qaeda, by far. They brought the most powerful nation in the history of the world to their knees. Can you imagine what they could do if they had funding and resources like us.............The Chinese army is also scary.
201343
America...the weapons they are using are american as well.
673291
What does a terrorist look like?\nAre we backing this terrorist's country at this time?\nWhat can I do as an individual to help stop terrorism?\nWhat is the definition of terrorism?\nCan the CIA, NSA, or the FBI win the war on terrorism
1012729
There is a comparison:\n1.Both kill civilians because they believe they are fighting for a  just cause.\n2. Al Qaeda behead the innocent using a blade, the Americans behead with Daisy Cutters and other missiles.
195797
Terrorism is only terrorism, which ever side you remain. Killings  innocents in World Trade Center, At London Railway stations or in Delhi crowded Markets are always terrorism which ever side you are. F-16  are bombing remote villages because terrorist are hiding there.
191970
Terroristic threatening.