That, and Joshua 14:5 - Mairzy doats and dozy doats and liddle lamzy divey. A kiddley divey too, Wooden shoe!
Had an unfortunate and sobering thought: what if there is literally nothing the US and western countries can do about hundreds of thousands of Arabs and Muslims holding murderous rage towards us until a generation or more goes by in which there are not hundreds of thousands of Arab and Muslim children whose moms and dads were killed by US and western weapons?
Blowing up ISIS might hurt ISIS, but it would create the next version of ISIS with all the collateral damage. Other than better internal surveillance and law enforcement to prevent and mitigate attacks in our territories, I wonder if the best (and maybe only) thing to do is nothing.
A better way to solve the problems in the Middle East.
All these troubles are funded through crude oil sales. Time to stop buying it from these butchers. Not only should the USA stop importing it, but we need to stop importing any product made from it. If China wants to fund Iranian terrorism by buying their crude oil, then the USA needs to impose a complete ban on Chinese products entering our country. Mexico has plenty of crude oil and I for one would rather see “Heche en Mexico” on my products than “Made in China”.
As a side benefit, we would reduce CO[sub]2[/sub] emissions …
Aside from your being apparently highly misinformed on the relative ease of completely overturning a commodity market in this way, the personal risk to any one person from terrorism is miniscule in comparison to the risk of economic and societal disruption to the same person that your plan would likely cause. Pass.
I don’t think there is a way to defeat terrorism other than to have a de facto policy of assassinating terrorists as they are found, as quietly as possible. Essentially disrupt individuals and cells by making the participants disappear permanently. Gitmo without the prison part.
The ordinary rule of law simply will not work given the vast grayness between holding an alternate opinion and being “radicalized” into machine-gunning a concert goer. What you have to do instead is give select folks the license to kill within the best judgment they can make that the one killed was a credible threat.
Such a policy has its own ramifications, especially because it denies due process and because it lends itself to the development of a police state.
Where there is territory involved, ordinary mechanism for war might be entertained, but the two processes are kind of separate: prosecuting a war involving territory versus “fighting (physical) terrorism” in the sense of terrorist activities projected beyond a territory.
If Paris-type attacks continue to be successfully executed, I suspect the vast majority of us will be willing to look the other way when appropriate assassinations are carried out, just as we did with bin Laden.
Sadly, you seem totally misinformed about where the USA imports it’s oil from … just about 40% comes from Canada … and just a reminder, Canada isn’t technically in the Middle East, it’s in North America.
Do you have any idea what they do to women in Saudi Arabia if they’re caught driving a car, or even seen outside their home without their father/brother/husband … the police chop their heads off right there in the streets.
Miniscule ???
You also seem uninformed about what terrorism is … one need not knife very many Israelis … or machine-gun down very many French … or take down very many American buildings … to make these peoples fear to go to the store or restaurant.
May Allah protect the pretty 14-year-old girl in Northern Nigeria … because Americans are too selfish to even try.
Well, I was indeed against your notion a mere half-hour ago, but your heartfelt, and no doubt entirely factual, appeal to emotion has gotten the better of me. Jihad on the Jihadists!
Really, though, Saudi women summarily beheaded for driving cars? You sure about that one?
Indeed. That plan is so crazy and would essentially destroy the economy. I’d prefer a few random acts of terror ever couple years to economic calamity.
Of course this plan would disrupt Western economies … but this is something we need to do anyway … and for a lot of different reasons. The OP would have us ship a mess of A1M2’s to the region for a third time, so there’s disruption either way.
No … Wikipedia makes no claim to this effect, but hells bells, we can’t trust Wikipedia now can we?
We should not, however, pretend that it doesn’t totally suck to be a woman in an Islamist state.
It also sucks to be someone who believes in freedom of expression where the freedom requested is an expression of antipathy toward Islam.
I wouldn’t be surprised, but what is the point of making their identities public? Just in case someone in Syria happens to see a wanted poster in their local post office, and matches it to the new guy who just moved in down the street in Raqqa; do you expect them to call the FBI to say that they’ve seen an ISIL member 5,000 miles from the U.S. borders?
And it doesn’t matter anyway, because price is what matters, and oil prices are set on a worldwide market. The U.S. consumes 1/4th of the worlds’ oil; we could easily make prices fall if we reduced consumption, regardless of whose oil we buy less of. By the same token, if supply is choked off in the Middle East, prices will go up, even the prices of oil from Canada. So yes, we could hurt the Saudis by reducing our consumption of Canadian oil.
Just saying. Doesn’t mean I agree with everything else said about oil here.