Easiest way to stop terrorists

[MikeWaters]

The easiest way is to kill their families.

You find someone that has committed terrorism against you, you then clandestinely kill their families.

It wouldn't stem it altogether, but would help.

Of course, we don't consider it moral to kill children in order to dissuade terrorists.

But I suppose if our backs are against the wall, and we are willing to exterminate everyone in Dresden with firebombs and everyone in Hiroshima and Nagasaki with Nukes, we would be willing to kill the elderly, spouses, and children on a selective basis.

Our backs are far from being against the wall.

[YOhio]

I assume you're being sarcastic, but in case you're not I'll point out a lesson learned in Godfather II.

Widow: All my respect, Don Ciccio. Don Ciccio. You killed my husband because he wouldn't give in to you. And his oldest son Paolo...because he swore revenge. But Vito is only nine. And dumb-witted. He never speaks.
Don Ciccio: It's not his words I'm afraid of.
Widow: He's weak - he couldn't hurt anyone.
Don Ciccio: But when he grows, he'll grow strong.
Widow: Don't worry. This little boy can't do a thing to you.
Don Ciccio: When he's a man, he'll come for revenge.
Widow: I beg you, Don Ciccio, spare my only son. He's all I have left. I swear to God he'll never do you any harm. Spare him!
Don Ciccio: No.

[MikeWaters]

I'm not being sarcastic. But I'm not saying I support it, because I don't.

I believe it was Jordan that did exactly this when the King's reign was threatened.

[Jeff Lebowski]

Gee, I don't know. If we get to the point where we no longer want to quibble about morality, a few well placed nukes would be a lot simpler.

[MikeWaters]

Originally Posted by Jeff Lebowski

Gee, I don't know. If we get to the point where we no longer want to quibble about morality, a few well placed nukes would be a lot simpler.

no it wouldn't. because you would have to nuke multiple countries and continents and kill perhaps tens or hundreds of millions.

I am talking about killing thousands.

[Mindfulcoug]

i have heard that once ,the most facile way to stop any sort of movement would be stop founding them..not sure how it works though

[Archaea]

Originally Posted by mindfulcoug

i have heard that once ,the most facile way to stop any sort of movement would be stop founding them..not sure how it works though

What is "founding"?

Do you mean "funding"?

If one can stop cash flow, then I agree, but given the tribal nature of Arab cultures, it is hard to break through the tribal nature. No imperial power has ever been successful of suppressing the radicalism in the Middle East over a long period. The British tried, and had brief periods of success through brutal, immoral suppression. It is an age old problem that nobody has solved since the 7th Century.

[Jeff Lebowski]

Originally Posted by MikeWaters

no it wouldn't. because you would have to nuke multiple countries and continents and kill perhaps tens or hundreds of millions.

I am talking about killing thousands.

Aha. Well, in that case...

[MikeWaters]

I think it was Syria, not Jordan I was referring to.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History...rhood_in_Syria

If you are willing to be absolutely ruthless, as the Romans were also, it is relatively easy to stamp out terrorism.

However it is questionable if one retains one's soul and priesthood in the process.

However, it was not until the 1960s that the Syrian Brotherhood came to play a major role in politics, as part of a broad-based resistance movement, which developed into armed struggle, against an authoritarian regime. After the Ba'thist military coup of 8 March 1963, the new regime made itself extremely unpopular by drastically restricting political freedoms, launching a campaign against Islam and in favour of atheism, and concentrating power in the hands of the military and the country's Alawite minority, marginalising the Sunni majority. From the start, Islamic political groups, of which the Brotherhood was the most prominent, represented the strongest opposition to the regime. In 1964 and 1965, strikes and mass demonstrations spread throughout Syria's major cities, and were crushed by the military. In 1970, General Hafez al-Assad, an Alawite, seized power; in 1973 violent demonstrations broke out again in response to a proposed constitution that did not require the president to be a Muslim. Syria's intervention in the Lebanese civil war in 1976 on the side of the Maronites (and hence technically on the side of Israel) sparked renewed agitation in Syria, and assassinations began to target members of the Syrian regime and prominent Alawites; the Muslim Brotherhood later claimed responsibility for most of these.[2][3]

On 16 June 1979, the Muslim Brotherhood carried out an attack on the University of Aleppo, killing at least 83 students as well as a professor, Dr. Yusef al Yusef. This incident is often cited by secular activist Wafa Sultan as the reason she came to oppose Islam in general. The Syrian government responded by sentencing about 15 prisoners, who had already been accused of being Iraqi agents, to death for belonging to the Islamic resistance movement. Terrorist attacks then became a daily occurrence, particularly in Aleppo and other northern cities. The government tended to ascribe these attacks to the Brotherhood, but as the armed resistance gained widespread popular support and more loosely defined armed groups appeared, especially in poor neighborhoods, it became difficult to determine the extent of the Brotherhood's involvement.[4]

In November 1979, a Brotherhood leaflet stated:

We reject all forms of despotism, out of respect for the very principles of Islam, and we don't demand the fall of Pharaoh so that another one can take his place. Religion is not imposed by force....[5]

In the days leading up to 8 March 1980 (the seventeenth anniversary of the Ba'thist coup), nearly all Syrian cities were paralysed by strikes and protests, which developed into pitched battles with security forces. Many organisations, both religious and secular, were involved, including the Muslim Brotherhood. The regime responded with overwhelming military force, sending in tens of thousands of troops, supported by tanks and helicopters. In and around Aleppo, hundreds of demonstrators were killed, and eight thousand were arrested. By April, the uprising had been crushed.[6]

In June 1980, the Brotherhood tried and failed to assassinate president Assad. The military retaliated by massacring between 500 and 1,100 prisoners, mostly Muslim Brothers or others allied with them, in the prison of Palmyra. The Syrian public did not find out about this until January 1981, when some of the soldiers who had carried out the massacre were arrested in Jordan for attempting to assassinate the Jordanian prime minister, Mudar Badran, who the Syrian government accused of supporting the Brotherhood, and an interrogation of the soldiers was broadcast on Jordanian television.[7]

A few days after the Palmyra massacre, a newspaper article by the president's brother, Rif'at al-Assad, stated that the regime was prepared to "sacrifice a million martyrs" (over a tenth of Syria's population at that time) in order to stamp out "the nation's enemies". On 7 July 1980, the government passed a law making membership in the Brotherhood punishable by death. Typically, however, the regime practiced indiscriminate, collective punishment: in August, after an attack on soldiers stationed in Aleppo, the army executed 80 residents of a block of flats that happened to be located nearby. In April 1981, after a failed terrorist attack on an Alawite village near Hama, the army executed about 400 of Hama's inhabitants, chosen randomly among the male population over the age of 14.[8]

During a 50-day moratorium on the application of the 7 July law, over a thousand Muslim Brothers turned themselves in, hoping to escape the death penalty; information published about them in the official press may give some insight into the composition of the Brotherhood's membership at that time. Most of those who gave themselves up were students under twenty-five years of age, from Damascus and other large cities; others were schoolteachers, professors or engineers.[9]

In August, September and November 1981, the Brotherhood carried out three car-bomb attacks against government and military targets in Damascus, killing hundreds of people, according to the official press. On 2 February 1982, the Brotherhood led a major insurrection in Hama, rapidly taking control of the city; the military responded by bombing Hama (whose population was about 250,000) throughout the rest of the month, killing between 10,000 and 30,000 people. The tragedy of Hama marked the defeat of the Brotherhood, and the militant Islamic movement in general, as a political force in Syria.[10][11]

[MikeWaters]

There are two competing interests:

1. What it takes to win
2. What it takes to retain our souls

That's why I hate Bush's torture policy so much. Because it doesn't satisfy either interests. The very small tactical gain of torture is outweighted by the public relations lost, and good will of other countries lost.

But I find it interesting that many people who support torture will not admit to any moral cost. Zilch. They are not honest.