The typical response of the right wing is through the use of force... Terrorism is a byproduct of the west's intervention into the political affairs of others... Then once they respond the only way they can (unless you can think of a more effective way than terrorism) we get our rocks off using superior military force that massages our bruised ego and provides profits to the military industrial complex... America and the west have been involved with continual wars throughout the expansion of our military industrial complex (and of course the highly profitable business of selling weapons to other countries) so if you are really logical, and follow the money, you will see what is the true motive behind the continuation of terrorism from the west's perspective...
Against the west? Sure. What about all those other countries listed? They don't intervene at all. They are making policies for their own country. They don't like it, and so they kill innocent civilians. A better response to all these matters would be to become a better world citizen, and stop their terrorist acts against civilains. Wouldn't you agree?
Ridiculous; if you have enough time to browse the internet, you can do for yourself and then let me know your results. Noone objects that. Terrorists who did 911 and the guy who wanted to blow up his crotch in a plane clearly had political reasons and - contrary to your claim - the knowledge of motivation does matter if you want to stop future attacks of this kind. There wouldn't have been 911 if not for US support for Israel and oppresive regimes in Middle East. There would have been no crotch bomber if not for US help to Saudi Arabia to bomb Yemen. If you do not want a terrorist from Pakistan in the future, do not attact this country. I you do not want a terrorist from Nigeria in the future, do not attack Nigeria. This is very simple. If you do not want to be killed by Muslims, stop bombing their land. <object width="560" height="340"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/dW0eiPiuUuk&hl=pl_PL&fs=1&"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/dW0eiPiuUuk&hl=pl_PL&fs=1&" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="560" height="340"></embed></object>
How would you convince the US government to stop terrorist acts against civilians in third countries in the future?
"A better response to all these matters would be to become a better world citizen, and stop their terrorist acts against civilains. Wouldn't you agree?" Unfortunately Gandhi's approach to a colonial power only worked because the British were a civilized society...unlike America who feigns civilization only in order to generate profits for the corporate masters... "What about all those other countries listed? They don't intervene at all. They are making policies for their own country." What about the other countries? Once an infection starts in one part of the body for some reason, it tends to spread to other parts of the body. Extremism, when shown to be an effective political tool...(and it has been an extremely effective tool)...spreads to others who have political desires. Let me write this only once for those with a brain, the brainless won't understand if you repeat the truth constantly: Terrorism is a political tool, not a religious tool... Extremist Islamic terrorism is political, not religions in nature.
Then you're a child if you believe that exiting the ME will cause their attacks against the US to cease forever. They will continue when they have the strength to do so. They have demonstrated that they will not stop, as long as the radical imams stir them up. Today it is political intervention in foreign countries. Tomorrow it will be their disagreement with the policies in their own country - as in some of those other countries listed. The fact that you are willing to give up your ability to determine your own path, and the path of your kids/grandkids is disturbing.
And gangs have found it politically experient - in "their" world - to kill all that oppose them also. Sometimes this means killing innocent civilians too. They don't care, as long as it furthers their "political" ambitions. And when I refer to their "political" ambitions, I of course mean "power". Should we not hunt them down, once there is sufficent evidence that they will continue? Or should we just leave them alone also?
god,your ignorance is astounding.People with sawdust for brains have an edge over you. our military force/influence and presence in saudi arabia and yemen is exactly what motivated the 911 and uss cole attacks you moron....osama states it emphatically...ever wonder why almost all the 911 hijackers were from saudi arabia you dipstick?Atta was from egypt.Got it? Our military influence holds the balance of power in egypt,israel,saudi arabia etc. It is a foreign military occupation by proxy. Why the f were you rescued from the sewage treatment plant after your mother flushed your fetus down the toilet?Your ignorance is incomprehensible.
The US rationalizes killing innocent civilians as "collateral damage" so why shouldn't that rationalization be afforded any other aggressive self absorbed faction? Should we "hunt them down." It didn't work in Ireland with the IRA, why do you think it will work in this case? You think our current invasion into Yemen to "hunt them down" is really going to help our cause in the long run?