# Will the war unleash more Terrorism, or will it decrease it? **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [March 31, 2003, 4:23am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/will-the-war-unleash-more-terrorism-or-will-it-decrease-it/165371 "2003-03-31T04:23:36Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 2
**Author:** ![OliverH](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/o/278dde/32.png) [@OliverH](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/OliverH)\ **Post date:** [March 31, 2003, 8:13am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/will-the-war-unleash-more-terrorism-or-will-it-decrease-it/165371/21 "2003-03-31T08:13:01Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by Mr. Wrong \* > \*\*It’s just that I keep being told that their attacks are in response to American foreign policy. So what do a bunch of Australian tourists in Bali have to do with that? \*\* They were mistaken for Americans? If I remember correctly, the perpetrator apologized, after his arrest, for hitting Australians. ---
**Author:** ![Apos](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/838e76/32.png) [@Apos](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Apos)\ **Post date:** [March 31, 2003, 8:16am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/will-the-war-unleash-more-terrorism-or-will-it-decrease-it/165371/22 "2003-03-31T08:16:50Z")
[onion] > [@](#): > > If you have witnessed the anger displayed by protesting muslims around the world every day over the last week, it will be clear that there is a high likelihood of increased terrorist activity. No, you’re wrong. > [@](#): > > Maybe, but if it is one MORE log on that fire, then the war is hardly conductive to CURBING terrorism, no? No. It is. > [@](#): > > There’s a reason why many other countries with a long experience fighting terrorism tend to use law enforcement nowadays, rather than the military, to curb it. Bloody Sunday has not helped curbing IRA activity. I disagree. [/onion] ---
**Author:** ![Typo\_Negative](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/typo_negative/32/484_2.png) [@Typo\_Negative](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Typo_Negative)\ **Post date:** [March 31, 2003, 8:24am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/will-the-war-unleash-more-terrorism-or-will-it-decrease-it/165371/23 "2003-03-31T08:24:32Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by OliverH \* > \*\*Maybe, but if it is one MORE log on that fire, then the war is hardly conductive to CURBING terrorism, no? \*\* Agreed, but I don’t believe this war _will_ curb terrorism. ---
**Author:** ![Mr.Wrong](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/d9b06d/32.png) [@Mr.Wrong](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Mr.Wrong)\ **Post date:** [March 31, 2003, 8:28am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/will-the-war-unleash-more-terrorism-or-will-it-decrease-it/165371/24 "2003-03-31T08:28:18Z")
> [@](#): > > Mohammed Atta and several of his colleagues studied in Hamburg, Germany, for several years. They were, during that time, observed by German intelligence, but not enough was found to justify action against them (not the least due to a lack of information exchange on an international level). Likewise, a colleague of theirs recently convicted trafficked the funds for the operation. Theirs was a key cell in the operation, and it has been rooted out, and the stance towards islamist radicals has become much more proactive and ‘aggressive’ -not just in Germany, but in numerous other European countries and numerous operatives have been arrested by law enforcement throughout Europe, many while they were planning attacks, both on European targets but frequently on US interests. I take your point that law enforcement has been instrumental in supressing al-quaeda worldwide, but I also think that the perceived weak response of the U.S. to previous terrorist attacks, i.e. Mogadishu, the first WTC attack, the Embassy bombings, the Cole, led to an invigorated and puffed-up al-quaeda that we deal with today. I also think the Afghanistan operation has supressed them to the point where they are having much more difficulty planning and carrying out attacks. ---
**Author:** ![blowero](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/41988e/32.png) [@blowero](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/blowero)\ **Post date:** [March 31, 2003, 8:43am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/will-the-war-unleash-more-terrorism-or-will-it-decrease-it/165371/25 "2003-03-31T08:43:55Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by Mr. Wrong \* > Is terrorism fueled solely by U.S. foreign policy? I think it’s a big factor. They ain’t burning those Bush effigies because they like the guy. > [@](#): > > Or support for Israel? That’s a big factor too. > [@](#): > > Or is it something even more basic than that, such as a desire for fundamental Islam to be the dominant way of life in the world? I think that’s an oversimplification. They want Islam to be the dominant way of life in the world in the same way that _we_ want Christianity to be the dominant way of life. The conflict with Isreal and U.S. support for Isreal are much more immediate factors. > [@](#): > > I have no doubt that the bin Ladens of the world will use this war to recruit people to their cause, but have they had any trouble recruiting them before? I don’t want to sounda alamist, but I would think that if bin Laden had an unlimited supply of suicide bombers at his fingertips, we could expect A LOT more terrorist attacks than we’ve had (or at least a lot more attempts). And I just can’t see how this war is possibly going to improve that situation. > [@](#): > > Does agression inflame them more than weakness inspires them? These suicide bombers are extremists, but I don’t think you can go so far as to say they are all completely ga-ga crazy to the point that they are just arbitrarily committing acts of terrorism for no particular reason. The obvious cause is their perception (whether right or wrong) of Isreal’s expansionist policy, and U.S. support for it. ---
**Author:** ![december](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/838e76/32.png) [@december](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/december)\ **Post date:** [March 31, 2003, 9:00am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/will-the-war-unleash-more-terrorism-or-will-it-decrease-it/165371/26 "2003-03-31T09:00:46Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by Mr. Wrong \* > \*\*I guess this gets down to the root causes of Islamist Terrorism, and since I can’t claim to have the answers as to what inspires that kind of fanatical action, I solicit your opinions. \*\* There are two schools of thought: 1. Terrorisim is caused by mostly valid objections to US, Israel and other western misconduct. The war constitutes more misconduct, so it will inflame terrorism. 2. Terrorist complaints about the US, Israel, and other western conduct are mostly invalid. They are not the real reason for terrorism. Strong responses will discourage terrorism. I go with #2 (as do most conservatives.) Note that we have not applied reasoning #1 to domestic terrorism against blacks, e.g., by racists in the KKK. E.g., Hate Crime Laws have been debated on this Board. However, no opponent has argued that severe punishment of violent racist acts will inflame the Ku Klux Klan and create new racists. That would be ludicrous. Nor has similar reasoning been applied to those who violently attack abortion doctors and abortion clinics. Even if you think the terrorists have valid complaints against the west, a good case can be made that this war will ultimately be good for the Iraqi people – that they will be so much better off with Saddam gone that it’s worth the suffering now. If and when this proves to the case, then the war should should make potential terrorists feel more grateful to the west. OTOH tyrants who rule Arab states would be personally threatened by an example of improved governance in Iraq, so it’s no surprise that they oppose the war and encourage their people to do so. ---
**Author:** ![OliverH](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/o/278dde/32.png) [@OliverH](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/OliverH)\ **Post date:** [March 31, 2003, 9:04am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/will-the-war-unleash-more-terrorism-or-will-it-decrease-it/165371/27 "2003-03-31T09:04:20Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by december \* > \*\*There are two schools of thought: > > 1. Terrorisim is caused by mostly valid objections to US, Israel and other western misconduct. The war constitutes more misconduct, so it will inflame terrorism. > > 2. Terrorist complaints about the US, Israel, and other western conduct are mostly invalid. They are not the real reason for terrorism. Strong responses will discourage terrorism. > > I go with #2 (as do most conservatives.) \*\* You wanted to say US conservatives, no? > [@](#): > > \*\* > Note that we have not applied reasoning #1 to domestic terrorism against blacks, e.g., by racists in the KKK. E.g., Hate Crime Laws have been debated on this Board. However, no opponent has argued that severe punishment of violent racist acts will inflame the Ku Klux Klan and create new racists. That would be ludicrous. Nor has similar reasoning been applied to those who violently attack abortion doctors and abortion clinics. \*\* Apples and oranges, since the measures in question were NOT taken by the targets of the hatred of these groups. > [@](#): > > \*\* > Even if you think the terrorists have valid complaints against the west, a good case can be made that this war will ultimately be good for the Iraqi people – that they will be so much better off with Saddam gone that it’s worth the suffering now. If and when this proves to the case, then the war should should make potential terrorists feel more grateful to the west. OTOH tyrants who rule Arab states would be personally threatened by an example of improved governance in Iraq, so it’s no surprise that they oppose the war and encourage their people to do so. \*\* This is not a good case, since it postulates a)similar perspectives by the Arab public and the western world. b)a better Iraq without Saddam, and it c)ignores that the Arab governments are not encouraging their people to oppose the war, but rather vice versa, are being pressured by the street to cease their tolerance for the war and actually oppose it. ---
**Author:** ![jjimm](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/ba8739/32.png) [@jjimm](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/jjimm)\ **Post date:** [March 31, 2003, 9:24am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/will-the-war-unleash-more-terrorism-or-will-it-decrease-it/165371/28 "2003-03-31T09:24:30Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by december \* > \*\*There are two schools of thought: > > 1. Terrorisim is caused by mostly valid objections to US, Israel and other western misconduct. The war constitutes more misconduct, so it will inflame terrorism. > > 2. Terrorist complaints about the US, Israel, and other western conduct are mostly invalid. They are not the real reason for terrorism. Strong responses will discourage terrorism. > \*\* This is a woefully simplistic false dichotomy. Not only that, but it is rather disingenuous to tack on that final sentence in point 2. It does not necessarily follow from the previous two sentences. Try this as a theory: 1. Terrorist complaints about the US, Israel, and other western conduct are mostly invalid. They are not the real reason for terrorism. Strong responses will encourage terrorism. or more plausibly: 1. Many of the reasons for the existence of terror groups are rooted in an invalid interpretation of US, Israel, and other western countries’ conduct; however some are rooted in the valid objections of the peoples whom the terrorists claim to represent. History shows that in many cases, military responses to terrorism tend to encourage recruitment to terrorism. ---
**Author:** ![scr4](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/59ef9b/32.png) [@scr4](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/scr4)\ **Post date:** [March 31, 2003, 10:31am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/will-the-war-unleash-more-terrorism-or-will-it-decrease-it/165371/29 "2003-03-31T10:31:19Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by december \* > **2. Terrorist complaints about the US, Israel, and other western conduct are mostly invalid. They are not the real reason for terrorism. Strong responses will discourage terrorism.** The OP asked specifically about the war in Iraq. Which terrorist act is it a response to? Unless you buy Bush’s argument about preventing Iraqi WMDs from falling into terrorists’ hands (which nobody on this thread has mentioned or defended so far), I don’t see how it can act as deterrent to terrorism. If anything, it shows how quickly the US can forget about the war against terrorism (i.e. the one in Afghanistan) and move on to the next war. ---
**Author:** ![Abe](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/f1d935/32.png) [@Abe](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Abe)\ **Post date:** [March 31, 2003, 10:42am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/will-the-war-unleash-more-terrorism-or-will-it-decrease-it/165371/30 "2003-03-31T10:42:23Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by spooje \* > My point is that I don’t think there’s anyone in the Arab world (whose capable of actually _being_ a terrorist) that was on the fence about the US, even before the Iraq war was planned. You could argue that this action will incite them to violence, but I have to ask “what incited them before?” A cursory reading of the history of the last century in the Middle East ought to correct that misconception, but the short response is that the West, primarily the US and the UK, have long interfered in the region, to the detriment of its people and nations. British colonialism, Western-imposed regimes, American anti-Soviet manipulation, unrelenting and one-sided US support of Israel, and all the way up to the present problem, mean that the Arabs have more than one grievance with the West and the US in particular. Some grievances are insubstantial, yes, but not all of them by any means. Please don’t resort to the “they just hate us and that’s all there is to it” simplistic rubbish. Besides, December seems to be taking that road and that is a bad sign for your position. You may read further on this extremely good thread started by **Collounsbury** , particularly in the first few pages: [http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showthread.php?threadid=172697](http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showthread.php?threadid=172697) > [@](#): > > And hasn’t the current administration (that I oppose, BTW) been warning us of terrorists and have included that as part of their rationale for the war? Iraq was simply not a significant producer of terrorism OR a threat of same. The argument that one day Iraq might launch a terrorist attack against Americans barely deserves mention, however, should you want to look it up, it has been discussed several times on these boards in the last month. These constant references to possible attacks and imminent threats, coupled with efforts to keep the wounds of 9/11 open are simply scare-mongering – of course it is [sub]dimly[/sub] possible at some stage in the future for something like that to happen. You touch on an important point though, and that is propaganda. Bush and his cronies make it a point to mention the word “terror” (or, in the case of Bush, “terrr”) every time they publicly mention Iraq, and if they can throw in Al Qaeda, even better. Only every now and then do some of the administration explicitly claim that there are links between AQ and Saddam Hussein, and usually they do so broadly and in passing, so as to leave behind the lingering association of the dictator with the terrorist group. That’s enough for the majority of uninformed people, who wouldn’t bother reading up on the actual evidence instead of taking the administration’s word for it. The only reasonable grounds for concern-- not necessarily worry or fear – is that Iraq may in the future provide AQ with some materials (which it is not yet established that Iraq even **possesses** ) to conduct a terrorist attack against Americans. > [@](#): > > so it’s a ‘chicken or the egg’ thing. We go to war because they’re supporting and planning terrorist strikes, There is no evidence that Saddam Hussein was planning or supporting terrorist strikes. 9/11 had, at least thus far, nothing to do with Iraq, nor did any other major terrorist attack that I can think of from the last years. According to Osama Bin Laden, Saddam Hussein is an “infidel” running an “infidel regime” – these are considerable insults in Arabic, enough to tell you the two are not exactly friendly. > [@](#): > > and they’re gonna be incited to terrorist strikes because we invaded. So, yeah, it could be one more log on that fire. But it was a big enough fire before this. Positing that war is necessary to liberate/disarm Iraq, there’s a smart way to do things and then there’s the Dubya way, which rather predictably involves the use of crippling stupidity. The smart way, which both Colin Powell and Tony Blair were pushing for, would have been to move against Iraq after forming a broad coalition that involved other Arab states and was sanctioned by the UN, or if not directly sanctioned that at least had the support of a number of important and relevant (to the region) representative members. Which might well have been possible, even likely, had Bush not spent the last years in office hard at work pissing off the leaders and populations of the world entire. Bush had the kind of domestic and global support advantage that no other leader, I think, has ever experienced: the unifying tragedy of 9/11. A moderately educated, fairly intelligent, statesman with medium- and long-term vision would have made good use of that political capital to shore up support, cement alliances and friendships, and start paving the way for a pre-emptive war, in essence an unprovoked act of aggression and a very serious step indeed. Instead, Bush chose to spend a year and a half rattling his cannon, issuing threats and insults, signalling to every leader friendly to him that he has more important things to think about than their issues, and displaying a shockingly naive unilateralism in a variety of forums. He tried to make a case for war, relying more on bluster and repeated assertions than on evidence or the influence of friendly nations, and he (predictably) failed. Then he turned around and, in a colossal exhibition of stupidity for the benefit of those few who didn’t yet think him a cretin, told the UN that it was going to be his way with or without the rest of the world. This while he was seeking the very support of the UN, mind you. “Give me, or else”. Visible result: an illegitimate war of aggression driven by a leader who has a hidden agenda (be it oil, or conquest, or whatever, the point here is not the actual fact but what masses _think_ it is). The war lacks UN support, meaning people in the region are inflamed beyond belief **even though everyone realizes what kind of evil dictator Saddam is**. Imperialist and colonial powers who, it is remembered, have done abundant damage to Arabs in the past are once again meddling in the region and attacking Arabs and Muslims. And so forth, refer to Collounsbury’s thread for more details on the perceptions and reactions engendered by this war. It may have been a big fire before, as you say, but Bush just poured napalm on it and shooed away the firefighters. This is a serious problem the effects of which will linger long after the war is won. The radicals that are being formed by this conflict right now _across the entire Arab and Muslim worlds_ won’t go away as soon as the fighting stops. They’ll be engaged in efforts against Americans, they’ll be spreading their hateful propaganda (including broadcasting), recruiting, training, raising funds, travelling, setting up networks and cells, and so forth – while the ability of ME governments to combat terrorism and radicalism has been slashed by the popular opposition to the war. Someone in another thread said that this war was a propaganda coup for Al Qaeda, or something to that effect. Absolutely, sadly, correct. As an aside, on [theonion.com](http://theonion.com) you’ll see a great caption on the right side: “New Bomb Capable Of Creating 1,500 New Terrorists In Single Blast”. Good satire, recommended. ---
**Author:** ![Abe](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/f1d935/32.png) [@Abe](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Abe)\ **Post date:** [March 31, 2003, 10:55am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/will-the-war-unleash-more-terrorism-or-will-it-decrease-it/165371/31 "2003-03-31T10:55:17Z")
> [@](#): > > _posted by jjimm_ > 4. Many of the reasons for the existence of terror groups are rooted in an invalid interpretation of US, Israel, and other western countries’ conduct; however some are rooted in the valid objections of the peoples whom the terrorists claim to represent. History shows that in many cases, military responses to terrorism tend to encourage recruitment to terrorism. The above deserves emphasis. I must add though that the suggestion (_not_ put forward by the poster quoted above) that the present war is a military response to terrorism is downright idiotic. Iraq had not committed any acts of terrorism against the US at all, and was not connected to any that we know of. That so many people are spewing this terrorism rubbish is evidence of the success of the administration’s propaganda conflating Iraq with the war on terror. ---
**Author:** ![elfje](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/e19b73/32.png) [@elfje](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/elfje)\ **Post date:** [March 31, 2003, 10:59am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/will-the-war-unleash-more-terrorism-or-will-it-decrease-it/165371/32 "2003-03-31T10:59:48Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by Mr. Wrong \* > \*\*The general view, at least around here, seems to be that the war in Iraq will cause a mighty backlash of Islamist Terrorism against the U.S., Britain, and anyone else who joins the “coalition of the willing”. Is this the case? Is terrorism fueled solely by U.S. foreign policy? Or support for Israel? Or is it something even more basic than that, such as a desire for fundamental Islam to be the dominant way of life in the world? > > I have no doubt that the bin Ladens of the world will use this war to recruit people to their cause, but have they had any trouble recruiting them before? Does agression inflame them more than weakness inspires them? I guess this gets down to the root causes of Islamist Terrorism, and since I can’t claim to have the answers as to what inspires that kind of fanatical action, I solicit your opinions. \*\* I think terrorism is fueled by both US foreign policy and their stance on Israel. Here’s an excerpt of an article on this site: [http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/in\_depth/2901495.stm](http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/in_depth/2901495.stm) “The Americans thought they were going to be greeted by celebrations and ululating women as they walked into Basra,” “But what they don’t realise is that people hate and fear them even more than they may hate or fear Saddam Hussein.” Candidates for liberation The reason for this fear and hatred, Khalid says, stems from the perception that Washington gives unqualified support for Israel, a country known here for gross human rights violations of Palestinians, threatening its neighbours and possessing weapons of mass destruction. “These are exactly the things the Americans and British accuse Saddam Hussein of doing - so why don’t they go to Palestine and liberate the Palestinian people from Israeli occupation, instead of ‘liberating’ Iraq - from an Iraqi leader?” Fact is, they never asked the Americans to come and liberate them. I have yet to see dancing people in the streets in the liberated area’s. And the way the US is behaving, i’d say it the current US administration that wants to be the dominant way of life in the world. ---
**Author:** ![Typo\_Negative](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/typo_negative/32/484_2.png) [@Typo\_Negative](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Typo_Negative)\ **Post date:** [March 31, 2003, 11:12am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/will-the-war-unleash-more-terrorism-or-will-it-decrease-it/165371/33 "2003-03-31T11:12:58Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by Abe \* > \*\*won’t go away as soon as the fighting stops. They’ll be engaged in efforts against Americans, they’ll be spreading their hateful propaganda (including broadcasting), recruiting, training, raising funds, travelling, setting up networks and cells, and so forth – . \*\* These folks weren’t doing that 3 weeks ago? ---
**Author:** ![jjimm](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/ba8739/32.png) [@jjimm](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/jjimm)\ **Post date:** [March 31, 2003, 12:10pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/will-the-war-unleash-more-terrorism-or-will-it-decrease-it/165371/34 "2003-03-31T12:10:53Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by spooje \* > \*\*These folks weren’t doing that 3 weeks ago? \*\* Sure they were. It’s just now there’s going to be a whole load more cannon fodder for them to use. ---
**Author:** ![antechinus](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/fbc32d/32.png) [@antechinus](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/antechinus)\ **Post date:** [March 31, 2003, 12:35pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/will-the-war-unleash-more-terrorism-or-will-it-decrease-it/165371/35 "2003-03-31T12:35:18Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by december \* > \*\*There are two schools of thought: > > 1. Terrorisim is caused by mostly valid objections to US, Israel and other western misconduct. The war constitutes more misconduct, so it will inflame terrorism. > > 2. Terrorist complaints about the US, Israel, and other western conduct are mostly invalid. They are not the real reason for terrorism. Strong responses will discourage terrorism. > > I go with #2 (as do most conservatives.) > > \*\* Yeah thats it. The complaints are invalid. Of course. There IS no real reason for terrorism. You are either: 1. A humanities student writing a thesis on the responses elicited on a message board using intentionally provocative and contrary elenctic. 2. FITH ---
**Author:** ![elucidator](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/8edcca/32.png) [@elucidator](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/elucidator)\ **Post date:** [March 31, 2003, 12:38pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/will-the-war-unleash-more-terrorism-or-will-it-decrease-it/165371/36 "2003-03-31T12:38:02Z")
Lets view it from the obverse side. Can it help/hinder efforts to _prevent_ terrorist attacks? After 9/11, America was the focus of an astonishing outpouring of sympathy. (I’m especially mindful of such scenes as a German candlelight vigil, with one wearing a shirt saying _Ich bin ein Americaner_…that sort of thing). We have quite thoroughly pissed that away. Ferreting out vermin that flit from country to country requires maximum international cooperation, dogged intelligence gathering and relentless, patient surviellance. Not the sort of thing that can be accomplished by massive military power. Quite the opposite. Even if we had not encouraged the development of further terrorists. we have hindered our own efforts to frustrate what terrorism _already_ exists. We _need_ the sympathy and cooperation of other nations, especially Islamic nations. Our contempt for thier opinions can hardly been said to further our cause. Ah, well. At least we have forced Saddam to pay for the attack on Pearl Harbor. ---
**Author:** ![Desmostylus](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/c57346/32.png) [@Desmostylus](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Desmostylus)\ **Post date:** [March 31, 2003, 12:48pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/will-the-war-unleash-more-terrorism-or-will-it-decrease-it/165371/37 "2003-03-31T12:48:52Z")
**antechinus:** **december** _isn’t_ #1 on your list. And you can’t say #2 in GD. 😉 ---
**Author:** ![december](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/838e76/32.png) [@december](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/december)\ **Post date:** [March 31, 2003, 1:10pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/will-the-war-unleash-more-terrorism-or-will-it-decrease-it/165371/38 "2003-03-31T13:10:44Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by elucidator \* > \*\* We _need_ the sympathy and cooperation of other nations, especially Islamic nations. \*\* We do need their cooperation, but sympathy is not the only motivator, nor is it the strongest one. A more long-lasting way to encourage cooperation would be demonstrating that we take the situation very seriously. ---
**Author:** ![Gorsnak](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/gorsnak/32/7587_2.png) [@Gorsnak](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Gorsnak)\ **Post date:** [March 31, 2003, 1:23pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/will-the-war-unleash-more-terrorism-or-will-it-decrease-it/165371/39 "2003-03-31T13:23:41Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by december \* > \*\*We do need their cooperation, but sympathy is not the only motivator, nor is it the strongest one. A more long-lasting way to encourage cooperation would be demonstrating that we take the situation very seriously. \*\* Let them hate, so long as they fear? ---
**Author:** ![Desmostylus](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/c57346/32.png) [@Desmostylus](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Desmostylus)\ **Post date:** [March 31, 2003, 1:28pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/will-the-war-unleash-more-terrorism-or-will-it-decrease-it/165371/40 "2003-03-31T13:28:41Z")
Nah, “Oderint dum metuant” sounds much more imperial. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/will-the-war-unleash-more-terrorism-or-will-it-decrease-it/165371.md?page=1) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/will-the-war-unleash-more-terrorism-or-will-it-decrease-it/165371.md?page=3)